On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:24:37AM +0100, Rey Francois wrote: > > I've sent this post yesterday but I'm pretty sure it will quickly fade under > the abyss of all the posts on this list. So I post my proposal again, using > a more appropriate title, and using the recommended format: > > Proposal for a mapper framework > ... > (1.5) interaction with other packages > > The mapper framework makes use of > - the Commons Digester > - the Commons BeanUtils > - JavaCC > - the Commons Pool (work in progress)
Perhaps we should expand the meaning of "interaction" to include how it compares to existing Commons components with similar goals. I'm very happy to see components competing for the same turf (as the charter allows), as long as it's clear to newcomers (ie, me:) what the differences are, in terms of features, stability (esp. API contracts) and future development prospects. I want to know which to spend time learning. +1 for putting it in the sandbox (with a cleaned-up build system:) +10 if you could outline in the proposal how it differs from David's validator. Btw, the javadocs look very good, which to me is a sign of overall quality. --Jeff -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
