Good point, well made. On 20 June 2011 17:49, Alasdair Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > I don't have a problem, but I think in general moving forward we should not > do a move and rename in one step. I think we should probably more, maintain > the old package name for 1 release. If we had done this with file store we > could have maintained the option of releasing application without releasing > util if util wasn't ready. > > Alasdair > > On 20 June 2011 11:53, Timothy Ward <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > +1 from me as well > > > > IOUtils never did make much sense in the FileSystem package, and the > > RememberingInputStream is not exactly JPA specific. > > > > Regards, > > > > Tim > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:46:01 +0100 > > > Subject: Re: Moving IOUtils and RememberingInputStream > > > To: [email protected] > > > CC: [email protected] > > > > > > Sounds ok to me. > > > > > > On 20 June 2011 11:40, Valentin Mahrwald <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > to close off ARIES-582 (Update util to be 1.0.0 ready) I would like > to > > move > > > > IOUtils and JPA's RememberingInputStream into their own package > > > > org.apache.aries.util.io from their current places (in the JPA > > container > > > > bundle and org.apache.aries.util.filesystem). For IOUtils that is > > another > > > > round of breaking changes but since IOUtils was already moved from > > > > org.apache.application.util.filesystem in the scope of the current > > SNAPSHOT > > > > level I hope that should not be a major issue :) > > > > > > > > Any thoughts / objections? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Valentin > > > > > > > > -- > Alasdair Nottingham > [email protected] >
