On 9/3/2014 12:25 AM, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
>> SimpleProperties and PropConfigStore currently live in
>> com.netscape.cmscore.base. Is there any objection to moving them to
>> com.netscape.certsrv.base so that they are available to the CLI
>> code?
>>
>> This item is the last of the review items (including Endi's
>> subsequent review) blocking the next cut of the patchset.
>
> Do those classes have dependencies on other server-side classes? I was
> thinking to simply use java.util.Properties. Or maybe just a String then the
> ProfileClient parses it into a Properties.
>
Aha, I was not aware of java.util.Properties. My immediate use case
doesn't require use of the sub-configs, so Properties would suffice.
Due to the heirarchical nature of profile config I suspect we might
*eventually* want PropConfigStore, but YAGNI for now, I guess.
In regards to moving SimpleProperties and PropConfigStore, there is
one other class - SourceConfigStore - that would have to have been
moved. AFAICT there are no other dependencies.
On the subject of SimpleProperties: how does our SimpleProperties
class differ from java.util.Properties? A cursory examination
reveals only two differences: SimpleProperties' hashCode() and
equals() methods take the `defaults' into account, whereas
Properties inherits this methods from java.util.HashTable.
The only place SimpleProperties is used is in SourceConfigStore
(which extends it), and the only place SourceConfigStore is used is
in PropConfigStore (protected SourceConfigStore mSource). Neither
PropConfigStore nor its subclasses invoke mSource.equals() or
.hashCode() so it seems - from this brief examination and without
the knowledge of history - that we could possibly get rid of
SimpleProperties?
If there is an important reason why SimpleProperties exists, I look
forward to learning about it :)
I don't know the history either, but the SimpleProperties allows you to
specify the default values of some properties so what you get is the
effective values. This might be useful for the server because the server
works using the effective property values, but I'm not sure if the
current code is actually using it. On the client side we should be
dealing with the configured properties only.
There are probably some other differences such as adding a header on the
top of the file and the property value encoding. I don't think we need
it on the client side though. Also note that some of these codes are
quite old, and newer/better utility classes might have been added into
the standard/common Java libraries since then, so in some cases it might
be better to replace it if possible. Usually the hard part is testing it
to make sure we're not breaking the existing functionality.
--
Endi S. Dewata