directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1239907 - in /directory/shared/trunk/ldap/model/src: main/java/org/apache/directory/shared/ldap/model/name/Rdn.java test/java/org/apache/directory/shared/ldap/model/name/RdnTest.java
Date Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:09:34 GMT
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com>wrote:

> On 2/3/12 11:09 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:59 AM,<elecharny@apache.org>  wrote:
>>
>>  Author: elecharny
>>> Date: Thu Feb  2 22:59:08 2012
>>> New Revision: 1239907
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?**rev=1239907&view=rev<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1239907&view=rev>
>>> Log:
>>> Fix DIRAPI-76 : new Rdn( "A=a,B=b" ) now throws an LdapInvalidDnException
>>>
>>>
>>>  Should the exception not be ... LdapInvalidNameComponent (we can create
>> one
>> if it does not exist).
>>
>> Reason I say this is that the whole issue with the non-intuitive
>> constructor was that the API user was thinking the argument can be a
>> multi-component relative distinguished name or a DN.
>> LdapInvalidDnException
>> might not fit here and it might make the user think they have to use a DN
>> rather than a single name component.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>>  Rahhh... Not such an easy move. In many many places, we are expecting a
> LdapInvalidDnException. Rdn is considered as a Dn with one single Rdn in
> most of the code.
>
> Question : would it worth the effort to change every part of the code when
> we can simply improve the message contained in the exception ?
>
>
Never thought it would be this bloody hard. Leave it as is then and just
improve the message contained in the exception.  This is my 2 cents.


-- 
Best Regards,
-- Alex

Mime
View raw message