Rather than what Charles suggests, I would prefer to take Stephen out for a beer, get him drunk and get him to submit JODA Time to Jakarta Commons.
The Lang.time part is intended to be a small set of helpers for Date stuff, but it might grow. I think Charles' point is valid, but unfounded yet. Lets worry about getting it coded and then decide what goes in the next Lang version. We've a lot of controversial bits and I know that I for one intend to have a debate later about just what is right and ready for the next Lang release. How does that sound? Hen On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Charles, > > I think you raise a good point, but taken to the nth degree, you soon end up > with a jar per package or class! I think the idea is that lang is supposed > to have all those useful bits and pieces that you need frequently, but maybe > not always. A couple classes that arguable should be removed would be the > RadomStringUtils and lang.enum package! > > I am not 100% disagreeing with you, but while the scope of the package is > just 3 classes or less, making it a seperate Jar seems like an increase in > overall work to maintain and deal with these classes. > > Now, if this package where to grow into 5 or six packages and 10 or 30 > classes, then I would definitly agree with breaking it out. Also, if we did > want weird/unusal stuff like getPhaseOfMoon() then this would make sense as > well. However, then you could just use Joda... > > Just my 2 cents however... > > Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Burdick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:33 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Date/Time should not be in [lang] > > > I haven't read the various Date/Time threads completely. (Cuz there's > over 50 in just the last few days!) > > But to me, putting these "Utils" into [lang] is a *bad idea*. > > This is the perfect opportunity to utilize the Commons charter with its > focus on well-defined common components. Everyone agrees it would be > great to have a new implementation of Calendar and DateFormat that's > not on crack like Sun's. > > However, I don't see any correlation with the rest of [lang]. Where is > the common use and common change that involves the rest of [lang]? How > would these date/time items depend on other parts of [lang]? > > I always thought it was weird and problematic that Sun slapped Date and > Calendar in [util] but DateFormat was in [text]. To me, if Commons > packages date/time objects in [lang], we're just repeating bad > practices. > > I'd much rather have an independent [DATE] or [TIME] or [DATETIME] > package. Simple, clearly defined. If you need to use 'em, you import > JAR, if you don't, you don't. > > Thanks, > Chuck > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[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]>
