DefaultTaskConfigurer constructors should use TaskProperties.getTablePrefix() instead of constant TaskProperties.DEFAULT_TABLE_PREFIX about spring-cloud-task HOT 9 OPEN

Because if we want to customize only one argument then we don't have to deal with and research internal mechanisms for table prefix
I mean I think it makes sense to assume that as long as you don't pass the tablePrefix as argument, you want to benefit from the default properties mechanism

Think somebody that just wants to pass a custom datasource, then he performs

public CustomTaskConfigurer(@BatchDataSource DataSource dataSource) {
        super(dataSource); 
}

But then he realises that the tables are being created in another place (when using latest SpringBoot3-enabled SCDF, for instance), he or she needs to research the implementation and understand that you need to reproduce the previous default

public CustomTaskConfigurer(@BatchDataSource DataSource dataSource, TaskProperties taskProperties) {
        super(dataSource, taskProperties.getTablePrefix(), null); 
    }

It's an undersirable side-effect, because you are extending DefaultTaskConfigurer, so everything yoo don't explicitly touch, should remain as the Default configuration according to the name

Indeed ideally IMO it should be something like

(@EnabledConfigurationProperties TaskProperties) ? taskProperties.getTablePrefix() : DEFAULT_TABLE_PREFIX

from spring-cloud-task.

Thank you for the comment and good catch on the javax.
But, I'm a little confused, as to why we'd want to pass in the TaskProperties to obtain the prefix when other constructors allow for the setting of the prefix?

from spring-cloud-task.