These are good questions, and I think they summarize well the current discussion.
Should HttpClient be promoted to a Jakarta project?
- Yes, that would seem to make sense, given the separate mailing list, the list of other "commons" libraries it depends upon, the separate mailing list, and the bugzilla needs, which all point to its slightly "heavier" nature than other commons projects.
At this point I would agree. It seems very likely that we will move in this direction. Arguments to the contrary are still welcome though.
Should HttpClient be a TLP?
- Don't think so. Too much extra infrastructure, not much extra benefit.
Though moving to a TLP sounds exciting, I agree that it may be too much now. In particular I think that HttpClient is not quite mature enough for this status. Also, I do not think the developer community is quite large enough to support this yet either.
Becoming a TLP could be a long term goal. As others have mentioned there are certainly possible HttpClient sub-projects (WebDAV, Gnutella, Http Cache).
When can HttpClient 2.0 ship?
- Although I think Oleg is being diligent in wanting to have a road-map in place for shipping 2.0, the contrary point is that as open-source software, the road-map is dependent on the interests that drive the product forward. As such, it is entirely unpredictable. I would like to see/hear Oleg's ideas about where we should be going, since his ideas will probably be quite helpful to the rest of us, but I'm not sure we need to hold up the 2.0 release for that. Email or a web-site posting would work just as well for that.
Hopefully soon. A road map would be good, but I think we still need to debate if we want to hold up 2.0 before it's done.
- I seem to recall that a bug was actually reported against 2.0rc3, which means that we need to have a 2.0rc4, doesn't it? I think we should be absolutely ruthless, that if a bug is not reported within the appropriate window, we should name whichever rcX release the final. If need be, we can always come up with a 2.0.1 release that patches any future discovered bugs.
I could be wrong here, but I do not think a rc4 is required, unless we would like one. I also prefer a 2.0 sooner, and a 2.0.1 if necessary.
Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
