--- Rich Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -1. > > > > Backward compatibility is the main concern. > [collection] is widely used. If > > the package is reorged, existing users (including > Struts and Tomcat?) can't > > upgrade to new releases without substantial > changes. > > > > Besides, the [collection] package is not that big, > compared to say java.util.*. > > Mind you, many people would consider that java.util > is pretty badly > organised. > > I agree that the inconvenience to users needs to be > carefully weighed > up. Sun has made the decision to keep java.util > together instead of > splitting it into java.collections, java.time, etc. > I think that > decision was a good one, but that doesn't > necessarily make it a good > design. :-) > > Rich
I'm also -1 to repackaging unless there is a more concrete benefit. Collections is widely adopted indeed: http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/latest/xref.html Inconveniencing users by repackaging so they won't be inconvenienced by our packaging. Does not compute. It doesn't even look that confusing to my eyes: http://nagoya.apache.org/gump/javadoc/jakarta-commons/collections/dist/docs/api/org/apache/commons/collections/package-summary.html#package_description - Morgan ===== Morgan Delagrange http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs http://jakarta.apache.org/commons http://axion.tigris.org http://jakarta.apache.org/watchdog __________________________________________________ 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]>
