Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 37233 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2004 19:48:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Jul 2004 19:48:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 64887 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jul 2004 19:48:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-lucene-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 64769 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jul 2004 19:48:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Lucene Developers List" Reply-To: "Lucene Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 64756 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jul 2004 19:48:08 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [209.10.110.95] (HELO londo.swishmail.com) (209.10.110.95) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:48:05 -0700 Received: (qmail 35176 invoked by uid 89); 20 Jul 2004 19:48:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.168.81?) (postmaster@cottrell-cutting.net@24.5.163.156) by londo.swishmail.com with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 20 Jul 2004 19:48:02 -0000 Message-ID: <40FD76D5.4020605@apache.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:47:33 -0700 From: Doug Cutting User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040619 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Re: VOTE: Change Token to public References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Erik Hatcher wrote: > I'm voting, based on discussions on lucene-user, to make Token public. +1 I think you mean to make Token non-final, in which case I'm +1 too. Probably we should also make the accessors non-final, make the fields private and add setters for some (or all) of the fields. This will also require a few changes to other classes in the analysis package which access the currently package private fields, making them instead use accessors. In short, we need a diff, complete with javadoc comments. John, would you like to submit such a patch? In general, things are expedited by high-quality patches accompanied by a description of the problems solved by the patch. A simple request to make more stuff non-final is too vague to be acted on. Doug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org