+1. Removing deprecations is a worthy cause for a major release in and of itself. In fact, I'd suggest that removing deprecated and/or obviously wrong code is a necessary precursor to a redesign.
Plus redesigns always scare me, since you never seem to get what you were expecting. :) On 7/3/07, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, when applying the fixes for IO-99 to commons-fileupload, I was originally under the impression, that this would be easily possible without any or at least with fully upward compliant API changes. Until I detected that for reasons, which absolutely escape me, someone made FileItem to implement the Serializable interface. I can only guess, that someone had the idea to put a FileItem into the HttpSession. But resource tracking within a persistent HttpSession, seems to me to be clearly outside the scope of commons-fileupload. At least, this doesn't fit into the default implementation, which assumes temporary files, for good reasons. At first, I have attempted to fix the problem by making the FileCleaner serializable, but Rahul has rightly pointed out, that I am doing nonsense. See http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--io--fileupload--svn-commit%3A-r518770---in--jakarta-commons-proper-io-trunk-src%3A-java-org-apache-commons-io-FileCleaningTracker.java-test-org-apache-commons-io-FileUtilsCleanDirectoryTestCase.java-p9520876.html for details. I have reverted the changes in commons-io and rethought my approach. The longer I thought about it, the more I came to the conclusion, that the only clean solution is to accept API changes. In particular, let FileItem no longer implement the Serializable interface. While we are at it, we could as well dissolve the the FileItemFactory and the multipart parser. Remove the whole bunch of deprecated methods. In other words, I propose to resolve FILEUPLOAD-120.or FILEUPLOAD-125 finally by dropping binary compatibilty and declaring the next version as commons-fileupload 2.0, not 1.3. I know that others (in particular Martin) had bigger plans for 2.0: Reimplement the thing based on httpcomponents, or commons-codec, or whatever, and stuff like that. Unfortunately I see noone who'd be ready to do that. In particular, not me. Thoughts? Jochen -- "Besides, manipulating elections is under penalty of law, resulting in a preventative effect against manipulating elections. The german government justifying the use of electronic voting machines and obviously believing that we don't need a police, because all illegal actions are forbidden. http://dip.bundestag.de/btd/16/051/1605194.pdf --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
