Arsnael commented on code in PR #1670:
URL: https://github.com/apache/james-project/pull/1670#discussion_r1294143589


##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/james/core/quota/QuotaCurrentValue.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+/****************************************************************
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one   *
+ * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file *
+ * distributed with this work for additional information        *
+ * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file   *
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the            *
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance   *
+ * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at   *
+ *                                                              *
+ *   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0                 *
+ *                                                              *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,   *
+ * software distributed under the License is distributed on an  *
+ * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY       *
+ * KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the    *
+ * specific language governing permissions and limitations      *
+ * under the License.                                           *
+ ****************************************************************/
+
+package org.apache.james.core.quota;
+
+import java.util.Objects;
+
+import org.apache.james.core.Username;
+
+import com.google.common.base.MoreObjects;
+
+public class QuotaCurrentValue {
+
+    public static class QuotaKey {

Review Comment:
   Those 2 QuotaKey classes that look similar but a bit different is looking 
wrong and confusing to me. 
   
   Or we:
   - find a way to unify that into one POJO (and separated, not a subclass of 
an other POJO) => then maybe using QuotaScope as identifier and finding a good 
structure would make sense then
   - just sticking to builders here (need to add them), and have the QuotaKey 
for the DAO with current values only (next PR), if sticking to Username as 
identifier.
   
   I start to think though now that refactoring QuotaScope to fit the 
identifier and scope needs might be the better way here 



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to