From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: [EGIT PATCH] Provide a more JavaBeans-style 'getName' accessor for the id Signed-off-by: Alex Blewitt Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:20:49 -0700 Message-ID: <20090812142049.GA1033@spearce.org> References: <1241909854-11498-1-git-send-email-alex.blewitt@gmail.com> <20090810155207.GW1033@spearce.org> <20090810205907.GY1033@spearce.org> <8ACC6C83-75FD-477C-9083-96CA426FC069@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "robin.rosenberg@dewire.com" , "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Alex Blewitt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Aug 12 16:20:59 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MbEhG-0003W3-FY for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:20:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752836AbZHLOUs (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:20:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752363AbZHLOUs (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:20:48 -0400 Received: from george.spearce.org ([209.20.77.23]:33104 "EHLO george.spearce.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751717AbZHLOUs (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:20:48 -0400 Received: by george.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 4D013381FD; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:20:49 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8ACC6C83-75FD-477C-9083-96CA426FC069@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Alex Blewitt wrote: > On 10 Aug 2009, at 21:59, "Shawn O." wrote: >> >>>> ./org/spearce/jgit/revwalk/RevTag.java:206: getName() in >>>> org.spearce.jgit.revwalk.RevTag cannot override getName() in >>>> org.spearce.jgit.lib.AnyObjectId; overridden method is final >> >> I can't apply this patch because getName() on RevTag is already >> defined with a different meaning. :-( > > That sounds dangerous. We now have a .name() and a .getName() with > different semantics. Can we not change the RevTag method name to > something else so that we dont have an inconsistency? Good point. We didn't think that RevTag.getName method through very well. Rename it to getTagName() ? -- Shawn.