replaced private to protected so that CommonEvents.java is more usable to derived classes.
I see no problems with that. I'll though wait a bit other opinions. Would not "no modifier" be enough. I mean do you need to access from classes external to the package?
Yes, no modifier would be just fine.
Your patch is in trunk at revision: 1807045
On request on dev ML I reverted at r1807142
Maybe you can give more justifications for your request, else please as invalid.
I'm deriving from CommonEvents.java and creating a new method that calls CommonEvent.writeJSONtoResponse(). Unfortunately, CommonEvent.writeJSONtoResponse() is private. Hence, I could not compile. I believe that methods that should not be accessible from other classes should at least allow derived classes to extend it. Hence, changing it to "protected" rather than "private" is more appropriate.
Can you give me a link to the dev ML that discusses this request?
Here you go https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c24787c2143b47be925dfc7caf2bdf3c931f7779d6524dde349ca6a0@%3Cdev.ofbiz.apache.org%3E