有一定的观点来回答这个问题。首先，java中的常量通常被声明为public、static和final。原因如下:

public, so that they are accessible from everywhere
static, so that they can be accessed without any instance. Since they are constants it
  makes little sense to duplicate them for every object.
final, since they should not be allowed to change

我永远不会为CONSTANTS访问器/对象使用接口，因为接口通常是需要实现的。这看起来是不是很有趣:

String myConstant = IMyInterface.CONSTANTX;

相反，我会在一些不同的方法中进行选择，基于一些小的权衡，所以这取决于你需要什么:

1.  Use a regular enum with a default/private constructor. Most people would define 
     constants this way, IMHO.
  - drawback: cannot effectively Javadoc each constant member
  - advantage: var members are implicitly public, static, and final
  - advantage: type-safe
  - provides "a limited constructor" in a special way that only takes args which match
     predefined 'public static final' keys, thus limiting what you can pass to the
     constructor

2.  Use a altered enum WITHOUT a constructor, having all variables defined with 
     prefixed 'public static final' .
  - looks funny just having a floating semi-colon in the code
  - advantage: you can JavaDoc each variable with an explanation
  - drawback: you still have to put explicit 'public static final' before each variable
  - drawback: not type-safe
  - no 'limited constructor'

3.  Use a Class with a private constructor:
  - advantage: you can JavaDoc each variable with an explanation
  - drawback: you have to put explicit 'public static final' before each variable
  - you have the option of having a constructor to create an instance
     of the class if you want to provide additional functions related
     to your constants 
     (or just keep the constructor private)
  - drawback: not type-safe

4. Using interface:
  - advantage: you can JavaDoc each variable with an explanation
  - advantage: var members are implicitly 'public static final'
  - you are able to define default interface methods if you want to provide additional
     functions related to your constants (only if you implement the interface)
  - drawback: not type-safe

只是要避免使用接口:

public interface MyConstants {
    String CONSTANT_ONE = "foo";
}

public class NeddsConstant implements MyConstants {

}

这很诱人，但违反了封装，并且模糊了类定义的区别。

我不会称这个类与常量相同(除了大小写)…我将至少有一类“设置”，或“值”，或“常量”，所有的常量都将存在。如果我有很多，我会将它们分组在逻辑常量类中(UserSettings, AppSettings等)。

仅仅为了保存常量而使用接口是一种糟糕的做法(Josh Bloch将其命名为常量接口模式)。以下是乔希的建议:

如果常数与 现有的类或接口 是否应该将它们添加到类中 接口。例如，所有的 盒装的数字基元类， 如Integer和Double，导出 MIN_VALUE和MAX_VALUE常量。如果 这些常数最好看成 枚举类型的成员 应该用enum导出它们吗 类型。否则，您应该导出 带有不可实例化对象的常量 实用程序类。

例子:

// Constant utility class
package com.effectivejava.science;
public class PhysicalConstants {
    private PhysicalConstants() { }  // Prevents instantiation

    public static final double AVOGADROS_NUMBER   = 6.02214199e23;
    public static final double BOLTZMANN_CONSTANT = 1.3806503e-23;
    public static final double ELECTRON_MASS      = 9.10938188e-31;
}

关于命名约定:

按照惯例，这些字段有名称 由大写字母组成的 用下划线分隔的单词。它是 重要的是，这些字段包含 要么是原始值，要么是引用 到不可变对象。

在单独的类中创建静态final常量可能会给您带来麻烦。Java编译器实际上会对此进行优化，并将常量的实际值放置到引用它的任何类中。

如果你稍后更改了Constants类，并且没有对引用该类的其他类进行严格的重新编译，那么你最终将使用新旧值的组合。

不要把它们看作常量，而应该把它们看作配置参数，并创建一个类来管理它们。让值是非final的，甚至可以考虑使用getter。将来，当您确定其中一些参数实际上应该由用户或管理员进行配置时，这将变得容易得多。

总之，以秒为单位的timeout值应该是一个配置设置(从属性文件中读取或像Spring中那样通过注入)，而不是一个常量。