Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/12/2002 03:26:08 PM: > On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/12/2002 12:31:41 PM: > > > > > On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I'd like to see a move of both of these components to commons. > > > > > > I'd like to see there actually be code in util worthy of a commons > > > project. Currently it's a tiny smattering of classes and while there's > > > nothing to say a project needs a certain size, you'd expect it to be a > > bit > > > bigger. > > > > So when does it become worthy? What's the criteria being applied here? > > Ought to have Unit Tests? More than just 4 or 5 odd classes?
Nah...in that case most of Ant would never have gotten going. It takes a while before reasonable unit testing is reached in most projects. > I do have one request here. The emails do not specify who should be talked > to in an effort to fix the build. ? The -dev list gets emailed. The developer(s) should be listening. > Do the Gump people listen to all the lists they build, is their a gump > list? I'd normally expect to reply to the email.. Then you would have replied to me :) The nag has me as the from address. [snip] > > > -1 > > > > Some explanation/technical justification please? > > I don't think a project which lacks a stable core of classes should become > a Commons Project. Core set of classes be damned. It's more important to have developers working together on making things better. > Thus the work at building some functionality into util with the identifier > sub-package. > > > > > 2) Email should be moved to commons proper. > > > > > > +0 [assuming it is current and not out of date, and that it is ready > > > codewise] > > > > Can you clarify what 'ready' is? > > i) Does it have a suitable level of javadoc. Not enough for an actual > release, but the bare minimum. Who cares about javadoc if there isn't usage documentation. For a 'common' component, isn't that more important? > ii) Does it have maturity. That is, has it spent some time in the sandbox > while the developers use it, modified versions or extended versions > in other projects. Maybe the code's been used to death before getting into commons? > iii) Does the project contain enough in the way of Unit Tests to show that > the developers are serious about testing. Is this a particular %age Code coverage? > iv) Is there a community, or is it a single developer. Does it have link > to another project which will show a scope for its community growth. > v) Does it have a webpage yet? Web pages are easy to generate....and harder to keep up to date. Check http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/, it's got old components listed. Or http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang.html which has virtually no documentation on using the library. Which sort of defeats the purpose of making a reusable library.... [snip] > > <devils-advocate> > > Ok, but for what purpose. It's obvious no developers are building it from > > source on a regular basis. Given you'd rather not move it to commons, why > > don't we just delete it and move the code that's needed back where they > > came from? > > </devils-advocate> > > Definitely a good view. It seems there are two options, kill it or find > functionality for it. > > I'd say there are 7 bits in there: > > 1) BitField => Collections possibly. or Lang. Yep. > 2) Interpolator => Kill. > 3) StopWatch ? > 4) WordWrapUtils => Lang's sandbox. It's a break off of StringUtils which > was not very stable at release time. Sounds like it belongs back in StringUtils. > 5) XmlUtils => Kill. > 6) identifier/ => Find somewhere > 7) GenerateUniqueId => Help commons-email with how to use identifier, or > commons-email contains this code I've fixed commons-email to use identifier. I suppose the hassle is the lack of direction about util. It seems to be a dumping ground, which, IMHO, aint such a good thing. I was under the vague impression it, like lang, was a collection of helpers to go with java.util..... -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog Work: http://www.multitask.com.au -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
