Good point James, thanks for the feedback! I suppose that's the reason why previous maintainers let the fields protected to access them directly, that will be replaced by setters/getters methods. Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 10:18 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Simone Tripodi > <simone.trip...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Phil! :) >> honestly I didn't understand which are the use cases when a pool needs >> to be reconfigured, that's why I've always used the pool in "configure >> and use" modality and Seb's suggestion sounded good to me. OTOH I >> didn't modify any single code line before hearing your thoughts since >> you know much more than me. >> If pool's property are mutable, so I need to add the setters, make >> them final otherwise :P > > What if you want to alter the way the pool works at runtime? Perhaps > you're seeing that it keeps causing long waits because you're not > allowing it to grow big enough? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
