Add Accessors for Two Member Fields Used in PeerNodeStatus

[Bombe]

Once again, I am blocked in writing Tests for Fred by the presence of fields that I cannot mock using Mockito. Have some accessors instead!

[bertm]

Could the accessors (and the fields that they access) be package-private to reduce the size of the public API?

[Bombe]

Could the accessors (and the fields that they access) be package-private to reduce the size of the public API?

Hmm, they probably could… depends on whether these methods need to be mocked by something outside of Fred. I don’t think there’s too much stuff using actual PeerNode objects outside of Fred, though… then again, plugins might? Hmm.

[bertm]

plugins might?

That's always possible, at least in theory. But most plugins would not have a business tracking peer nodes. Even then, these particular fields are pretty niche. I cannot imagine legitimate reasons for plugins to meddle with the peer backoff statistics.

[Bombe]

plugins might?

That's always possible, at least in theory. But most plugins would not have a business tracking peer nodes. Even then, these particular fields are pretty niche. I cannot imagine legitimate reasons for plugins to meddle with the peer backoff statistics.

I mean, it doesn’t even matter, because the original fields are still public. 😄

[Bombe]

Could the accessors (and the fields that they access) be package-private to reduce the size of the public API?

Oof, I really need to learn to read better. 😄

Yeah, I’ll make the fields private, they weren’t used outside of PeerNode and PeerNodeStatus anyway.