I have a few concerns, though:
1.) URLCodec that we should be using has not been officially released yet
True, but neither has HttpClient 2.1:) We will most likely have to put some effort into getting a final codec release that contains this code.
2.) Introduction of an external dependency is (IMHO) also a breach of contract very much like API breakage.
I would like to suggest that we keep a copy of relevant codec classes in HttpClient source tree for the 2.1 release. Does anyone see any downsides to that I may be missing?
I agree, adding a jar could be considered an API break, but it was part of our plan for 2.1. The only real API changes that this requires is removing the already deprecated Base64 code. The EncodingUtil class will not be changed.
Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
