Using 'builder()' factory method instead of constructor

Currently, we instantiate a builder by calling a constructor or a static method in a builder class:

Server server = new ServerBuilder()
        .foo()
        .bar()
        .build();

I wonder if it was a good idea or we need to reconsider this decision in favor of having builder() method:

Server server = Server.builder()
                      .foo()
                      .bar()
                      .build();

The pros of builder() are:

• We can easily align at '.', which is better in terms of aesthetics.
• We do not need to import ServerBuilder if we chain all.

[ikhoon]

@4whomtbts It’s good to be back! I think you need to know some changes in #2323.

1. Please make sure your current branch is up-to-date from the master branch. Lots of class which have HTTP keyword have been deprecated.
2. HttpAuthServiceBuilder and HttpFileServiceBuilder have been done, you may want to skip them.
3. This issue is scheduled to apply before release 1.0.0. Maybe in the middle of January. 😉

I’m looking forward to your next PR. Cheer up!

---

• ClientBuilder
• DefaultClientBuilderParams
• ServerListenerBuilder
• ~HttpAuthServiceBuilder~
• SimpleCompositeServiceBuilder
• SimpleCompositeRpcServiceBuilder
• CorsPolicyBuilder
• CorsServiceBuilder
• DocServiceBuilder
• HttpFileBuilder
• ~HttpFileServiceBuilder~
• LoggingServiceBuilder
• JettyServiceBuilder
• ArmeriaRetrofitBuilder
• KeyStoreCredentialResolverBuilder
• SamlServiceProviderBuilder
• TomcatServiceBuilder
• ZooKeeperUpdatingListenerBuilder

[anuraaga]

+1.001 for builder vs +1 for newBuilder 😃