[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-serviceability-dev
Subject:    Re: jmx-dev RFR 7199353: Allow ConstructorProperties annotation from any package
From:       Mandy Chung <mandy.chung () oracle ! com>
Date:       2015-10-19 23:55:05
Message-ID: B60B1BCD-6534-4B0C-838B-C6608FFE3F62 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


> On Oct 16, 2015, at 5:04 AM, Jaroslav Bachorik <jaroslav.bachorik@oracle.com> \
> wrote: 
> On 15.10.2015 21:32, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > 
> > On 15/10/2015 16:55, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
> > > 
> > > Any objections to changing the annotation name to @ConstructorMapping
> > > to make it better distinguishable from
> > > @java.beans.ConstructorProperties ?
> > > 
> > Not from me. Do you mind updating the webrev so that we can see the
> > updated javadoc?
> 
> I have decided for @ConstructorParameters - it is rather close to the original \
> @ConstructorProperties and corresponds to the annotation purpose. 
> I tried to address all the comments gathered in this review.
> The updated webrev is http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8139727/webrev.00
> 

I like the new name.  The change looks good except minor things in \
ConstructorParameters.java

 61  * and {@code @javax.management.annotation.ConstructorParameters} 
- package name needs mixup.

 74     */
- formatting nit - need one more space


> The issue number had to be changed due to unlucky escape of the fix in progress \
> into the public repository (which was immediately backed out but the original issue \
> was 'spent'). 
> Though the issue title still contains "ConstructorProperties" - I will change it to \
> "ConstructorParameters" as soon as we agree on this name.

Thumbs up from me.

Mandy=


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]