R4481 Checkstyle Parameter Rename Issue

[Cantor, Scott]

On 9/13/16, 9:18 AM, "dev on behalf of Rod Widdowson" <dev-bounces at shibboleth.net on behalf of rdw at steadingsoftware.com> wrote:

> But it struck me that we might want to minimise accidental fall-out by removing any us of
> name constructor parameters in our public conf files.  We could do this now with no effect
> (except on readability).

I think readability really is the point though, and my opinion is that it's necessary, so we either live with it or stop using c'tor arguments so much.

I think the longer term issue is really consistency in approach and what we do with all this component init/destroy stuff. If we have it, we need to use it, and if not, let's dump it at some point later.

> 1) c:_0="foo" isn't as readable as c:thing="foo"  (I think the consensus here is "tough").
> 2) It doesn't remove any requirements on us to keep the parameter name the same from now
> on.

Which is why I'm of the view we should be saying "tough" to us, not our users.
    
-- Scott