Chris: You POV seems reasonable. From my end, unfortunately, I cannot take the time right now to do anything except tweaks here and there to move a release along. I'd like to let other committers opine and volunteer on this one (at least I get unbusy.)
Gary > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:07 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [codec] crypto-compat BigInt patch, no feedback for one month > > Gary Gregory wrote: > > >Hello: > > > >I've done some [codec] work over the years and there are probably enough > >little fixes for a minor release but I've not seen anything to motivate > >me for a major release. > > > > > I don't mind using a snapshot or a minor release, I would just prefer > not to have to worry about maintaining a local copy and a local patch > for what I find is useful functionality. > > >Frankly, copying code from one project to another is not a motivation > >for me and actually it is not something I want to promote. If I need > >some functionality from one project, I use that project. I happen to use > >both [codec] and [xml-security] at work, so, personally, I am not driven > >to do anything about this issue. > > > > > It isn't a strict copying of code (rewrote for clarity, matching style, > javadoc, and added junit tests), and I think this functionality really > belongs in codec not xml-security for a couple of reasons: > 1) It is useful outside of xml security for code that does not need > anything from xml security but this functionality (which is not > obviously/easily exposed from xml security) > 2) It has to do with base64 encoding and fits in well to the existing > Base64 class > > Chris > > >What [codec] needs IMO is the ability to operate on streams and > >readers/writers. > > > >Gary > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: robert burrell donkin > >> > >> > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 2:35 PM > >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > >>Subject: Re: [codec] crypto-compat BigInt patch, no feedback for one > >> > >> > >month > > > > > >>On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 09:48 -0600, Chris Black wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Over a month ago I submitted a proposed patch to commons-codec to > >>> > >>> > >add > > > > > >>>crypto-compatible BigInteger encoding support to Base64 (bugzilla > >>>#38657). I have not received any feedback on this patch so far and > >>>realize it may not be a priority for others, but I was wondering if > >>>there was anything else I could do to get a committer to consider > >>> > >>> > >this > > > > > >>>patch. Or perhaps guidance on what I may be doing wrong in terms of > >>> > >>> > >the > > > > > >>>development/communication process. > >>> > >>> > >>i'm not sure you've done anything particularly wrong. codec's probably > >> > >> > >a > > > > > >>little short of developer energy ATM and so reports may get a little > >>dusty. so, posting a mail such as this is the right thing to do in the > >>circumstances. > >> > >>i'm not very familiar with codec. hopefully, a committer who is will > >>step up sometime soon. (it can take a few days to establish > >>communication.) > >> > >>if not, i'll try to take a look but it'll probably be the weekend. > >> > >>i probably won't find the energy to push codec forward in the medium > >>term so you might find yourself submitting more patches if you need > >> > >> > >more > > > > > >>changes... > >> > >>- robert > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
