Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on May 23, 2023. It is now read-only.

Code cleanup (for v0.31.0)#196

Closed
mcumings wants to merge 1 commit intoopentracing:v0.31.0from
mcumings:v0.31.0-nits
Closed

Code cleanup (for v0.31.0)#196
mcumings wants to merge 1 commit intoopentracing:v0.31.0from
mcumings:v0.31.0-nits

Conversation

@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mcumings mcumings commented Sep 28, 2017

  • Propagate @deprecated annotation to implementations
  • Remove redundant "static final" definition from interface
  • Use Collections.emptyMap instead of Collections.EMPTY_MAP to preserve type

This was referenced Sep 28, 2017
Closed
Closed
@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

mcumings commented Sep 28, 2017

@pavolloffay - The latest in the saga. Reduced to just the items that everyone immediately agrees upon and targeting the new v0.31.0 branch.

@coveralls
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coveralls commented Sep 28, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 78.598% when pulling 86395cd on mcumings:v0.31.0-nits into fb86fee on opentracing:v0.31.0.

@mcumings
Code cleanup
a774afb 
- Propagate @deprecated annotation to implementations
- Remove redundant "static final" definition from interface
- Use Collections.emptyMap instead of Collections.EMPTY_MAP to preserve type
@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

mcumings commented Sep 28, 2017

hmm.. surprising that it pulled in those other commits when I based the code on the HEAD of 0.31.0.

@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

mcumings commented Sep 28, 2017

Fixed by re-pushing the branch. Much better...

@coveralls
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coveralls commented Sep 28, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 78.598% when pulling a774afb on mcumings:v0.31.0-nits into 27327e9 on opentracing:v0.31.0.

@pavolloffay
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

pavolloffay commented Sep 29, 2017

LGTM,

but why to 0.31.0 branch? I would prefer merge it to the master as these changes are not based on 0.31.0.

@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

mcumings commented Sep 29, 2017

I'm splitting this out of the work previously committed under #181 to make the changes distinct rather than rolling them in with the other conceptual change.

@tedsuo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

tedsuo commented Sep 29, 2017

It would be great if we could get this merged and move on to timestamps. I think its fine to make another PR to cherry-pick this commit onto master as well, since it's valid in both 0.31 and 0.30.

@mcumings mcumings changed the title Code cleanup Code cleanup (for v0.31.0) Sep 29, 2017
@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

mcumings commented Sep 29, 2017

Okay, sure. I'm not sure what branching model you folks are operating under so I'll just do as I'm told. :)

I've raised #199 for master.

@pavolloffay
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

pavolloffay commented Oct 2, 2017

@mcumings thanks, I think we could just close and merge #199. The next release will be rebased with the master.

@mcumings
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

mcumings commented Oct 2, 2017

Okay, like I said, I don't know what the branching strategy is here. Closing this issue in favor of #199.

@mcumings mcumings closed this Oct 2, 2017
@mcumings mcumings deleted the v0.31.0-nits branch October 2, 2017 14:55
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@mcumings @coveralls @pavolloffay @tedsuo