I would like to see this happen as well. But first, I want to work on the codec package, and also an I/O package, and make sure that utils doesn't overlap with these. I also want to get unit tests on all of this stuff before a release.
Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephane Bailliez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 4:22 AM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: RE: Codec Sandbox (was: To fork or not ...) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paulo Gaspar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > [...] > > Ant might have something and maybe Turbine too. Do not take > > this as a comprehensive list. I suspect that the XML > > projects might have a lot more. > > From the top of my head you will find 2 or 3 base64 classes > mixed between sandbox, proposals and Ant code base. > > I blatently copied the one from commons-utils for some > sandbox code because of no status in release and no jar > available. It has been in sandbox for a very long time, 90% > of the code is in for 5 months now. > > commons-utils is very useful and is to me the very first step > in 'commons', so I think a 1.0 release should be scheduled so > that it is made available. What do utils committers think ? > > I think there are many things in it that would justify a > release. If some classes are not ready for production, then > they should not be in the first release but should wait until > they are ready. But obviouslly some are perfectly ready for > production. > > Stephane > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:commons-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For > additional commands, > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
