Re: [eclipselink-dev] Patch for bug 319256 is available. Please review.

[Andrei Ilitchev <andrei.ilitchev@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi David,

Why have you added a private constructor to PersistenceUnitProperties class?

It's pretty clear from the context of the file that it just defines some 
constants and instantiating it doesn't make any sense (and even if the 
class is instantiated there is no harm in that).

Eclipselink has a clear pattern of this kind of classes - see for 
instance all the other non-enum classes in 
org.eclipse.persistence.config package

Thanks,
Andrei

On 2/24/2011 2:28 AM, Goerler, Adrian wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> thanks for the patch. I have added two (minor) comments to the bug.
>
> -Adrian
>
> *From:* eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *David Minsky
> *Sent:* Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2011 20:35
> *To:* EclipseLink Dev
> *Subject:* [eclipselink-dev] Patch for bug 319256 is available. Please
> review. (JavaDoc)
>
> *Bug 319256* <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=319256> -
> Some constants in PersistenceUnitProperties are missing JavaDoc
>
> A patch has been uploaded to the bug and is available for review.
> Comments are, of course, welcome.
>
> Regards,
>
> -David
>
> --
> Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
> David Minsky | Senior Member of Technical Staff
> Phone: +1 613 2884605 <tel:+1%20613%202884605>
> Oracle Oracle Server Technologies Sustaining Engineering
> ORACLE Canada | 45 O'Connor Street, Ottawa, Ontario | K1P 1A4
> Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>Oracle is committed to
> developing practices and products that help protect the environment
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev