Remove Tag::setName

[chr-hertel]

In this case we can move it to constructor

[TheDevick]

Can we use a readonly proprierty in the Entity and keep the setName function?

Why?

Just because sometimes it makes sense to call the constructor with no parameters - new Tag(); and then call the setName() function, so making the code more readable in some cases

[chr-hertel]

I would not agree on having public methods for "just in case..." and within this demo application it is not needed.
And I usually try to avoid those nullable properties if possible.

And no, you cannot combine readonly with setters. That's basically the feature :)

[javiereguiluz]

Christopher, thanks for this nice contribution and sorry it took me so long to merge it.

Please note that while merging I tweaked the new Tag entity constructor a bit. See fbc76bb Your code is of course perfectly valid, but I think it could look too advanced/unconventional for some folks using this demo application. In the future we might change it again and use your version, but for now I'd prefer to use this more traditional constructor. Thanks!

[chr-hertel]

@javiereguiluz Totally get your point! :) Thanks for coming back to this!