From 831e277d0084ee0c37881344e826e0ba3f54c5af Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Reinier Zwitserloot <r.zwitserloot@projectlombok.org>
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2021 15:06:08 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [website] Clarified @Accessors documentation and added links
 to issue #2464 and issue #2693

---
 website/templates/features/experimental/Accessors.html | 9 +++++++--
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/website/templates/features/experimental/Accessors.html b/website/templates/features/experimental/Accessors.html
index 97017dc634..54d507f884 100644
--- a/website/templates/features/experimental/Accessors.html
+++ b/website/templates/features/experimental/Accessors.html
@@ -15,7 +15,12 @@
 				New feature – community feedback requested.
 			</li>
 		</ul>
-		Current status: <em>positive</em> - Currently we feel this feature may move out of experimental status with no or minor changes soon.
+		Current status: <em>neutral</em> - Some changes are expected. These changes are intended to be backwards compatible, but should start in an experimental feature:
+		<ul>
+			<li>Open feature request: naming behaviour for properties that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. Half of specs, tools and lombok users prefer that a field named <code>uLimit</code> into <code>getULimit</code> (including lombok) and the other half turn prefer <code>getuLimit</code>. <code>@Accessors</code> may be involved in any update that addresses this <a href="https://github.com/rzwitserloot/lombok/issues/2693">request</a>.</li>
+			<li>Open feature request: More control over naming accessors; for example to address creatively named boolean properties: Turn <code>boolean wasRunning</code> into <code>boolean wasRunning()</code> instead of <code>boolean isWasRunning()</code>, as well as more expansive prefix support. <code>@Accessors</code> will be involved if this feature <a href="https://github.com/rzwitserloot/lombok/issues/2464">request</a> is addressed.</li>
+			<li><code>@Accessors</code> currently does not 'cascade' from field <code>@Accessors</code> annotation to the class-level <code>@Accessors</code> annotation, but it does 'cascade' to <code>lombok.config</code>. Changing this is not difficult but backwards incompatible. It's not likely to break much existing code, but this needs to be decided on before the feature can move out of <em>experimental</em> status.</li>
+		</ul>
 	</@f.experimental>
 
 	<@f.overview>
@@ -39,7 +44,7 @@
 				</li>
 			</ul>
 		<p><p>
-			The <code>@Accessors</code> annotation is legal on types and fields; the annotation that applies is the one on the field if present, otherwise the one on the class. When a <code>@Accessors</code> annotation on a field is present, any <code>@Accessors</code> annotation also present on that field's type is ignored.
+			The <code>@Accessors</code> annotation is legal on types and fields; the annotation that applies is the one on the field if present, otherwise the one on the class. When a <code>@Accessors</code> annotation on a field is present, any <code>@Accessors</code> annotation also present on the class the field is in, is entirely ignored, <em>even for properties not configured on the field <code>@Accessors</code></em>. This in contrast to any <code>lombok.config</code> configuration keys which serve as fall-back default if any explicit <code>@Accessors</code> annotation doesn't specify.
 		</p>
 	</@f.overview>