puh that's muddy.

Actually the @since for the new package are all 0.1 now. We have no backward 
compat to bury with.

LieGrue,
strub




----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert Scholte <[email protected]>
> To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 6:45 PM
> Subject: Re: status update maven-shared-utils
> 
> We also need to do something with the @since-tags
> I'm not sure if this doclettag only allows a numberic value, otherwise 
> I'd like to prefix it with plexus-utils.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Robert
> 
> Op Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:11:55 +0200 schreef Kristian Rosenvold 
> <[email protected]>:
> 
>>  All the plugin IT's pass with m-s-u trunk now, and I am finshed with 
> all
>>  the stuff I planned to do.
>> 
>>  I am well in progress on a replacement for Xpp3Dom. Initially we're 
> just
>>  looking at a compatible replacement
>>  in a different package that can be used as a replacement for 90-95% of the
>>  use cases.
>> 
>>  I think we should release "0.9" now or at least very soon, and 
> just give
>>  the Xpp3Dom stuff a couple of extra weeks and we can call that version 1.0
>>  ;)
>> 
>>  Kristian
>> 
>> 
>>  2012/10/15 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>> 
>>>  Guys, you rock!
>>> 
>>>  I also like to add my thanks to Stephen as he started the
>>>  plexus-utils-commons-bridge over in our sandbox. Without this work we 
> would
>>>  not have been able to do this so fast. Also a thanks to all guys who 
> helped
>>>  importing the stuff they wrote into this module.
>>> 
>>>  LieGrue,
>>>  strub
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>  > From: Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]>
>>>  > To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>
>>>  > Cc:
>>>  > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 8:37 AM
>>>  > Subject: Re: status update maven-shared-utils
>>>  >
>>>  > I have been running m-s-u with the entire maven codebase loaded,
>>>  basically
>>>  > analyzing all usages
>>>  > and deleting any code from m-s-u that is unused in maven. In a 
> couple of
>>>  > cases I have also
>>>  > modified maven code to use commons code directly so we can avoid 
> some
>>>  code
>>>  > in m-s-u.
>>>  >
>>>  > We discussed this on IRC and those of us present figured it would 
> be a
>>>  good
>>>  > idea to
>>>  > keep m-s-u at a minimum and *not* use this as a playground for 
> adding all
>>>  > sorts of
>>>  > other nifty features we might feel like adding, both now and in 
> the
>>>  future.
>>>  > (I know this *sounds*
>>>  > so good, but it also sounds like wishful thinking ;) I also think 
> it's
>>>  > desirable that m-s-u *NOT*
>>>  > support any use cases outside maven ;)
>>>  >
>>>  > I have in practice migrated "most" of the maven codebase 
> to use m-s-u,
>>>  > and
>>>  > what remains is basically Xpp3Dom and its close 
> "friends". (So while
>>>  > everything in
>>>  > org.codehaus.plexus.util.xml is deprecated, that's really only 
> because we
>>>  > don't have
>>>  > Xpp3Dom yet)
>>>  >
>>>  > I only have a few things left before I'm "1.0" 
> ready:
>>>  > A) Finish analyzing all the usages so I can trim m-s-u further 
> down. We
>>>  can
>>>  > always reinstate code if I delete too much ;)
>>>  > B) Make plugin it's run with m-s-u (decent progress has been 
> made here,
>>>  > more or less finished)
>>>  > C) I am also considering just doing a clean reimplementation of 
> Xpp3Dom
>>>  and
>>>  > its companions, realistically it's not that
>>>  > many lines of code. Unsure if that is "1.0" material.
>>>  >
>>>  > Kristian
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > 2012/10/14 Robert Scholte <[email protected]>
>>>  >
>>>  >>  Hi,
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  Mark, Kristian and I have made some good progress on the 
> Maven Shared
>>>  >>  Utils.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  The project has now 2 compile-scoped dependencies: 
> commons-io-2.2
>>>  (final
>>>  >>  1.5 compatible version) and jsr305-2.0.1 (for the support of 
> @Nonnull
>>>  and
>>>  >>  @Nullable)
>>>  >>  Since we still think that Maven Shared Utils should not have 
> any
>>>  >>  dependencies, the commons-io is shaded.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  ReaderFactory and WriterFactory now return a Reader or 
> Writer, the
>>>  method
>>>  >>  decides which implementation is used. Right now that is 
> commons-io
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  CollectionUtils has been removed, since there is a very small 
> usage of
>>>  it.
>>>  >>  With generics this class has become useless.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  ExceptionUtils is nominated to be removed, since almost every
>>>  Exception in
>>>  >>  JDK5 can chain exceptions. For the few left we're looking 
> if it is
>>>  > worth
>>>  >>  to keep it here or let does project depend on the original 
> plexus-utils
>>>  >>  (different
>>>  >>  package, so no class-collision)
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  The whole org.apache.maven.shared.utils.**xml package is 
> nominated to
>>>  be
>>>  >>  removed as well, since all its classes are deprecated.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  We're making heavy usage of generics, varArgs and other 
> JDK5 specific
>>>  >>  features.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  My opinion is that we need to remove all deprecated code, 
> solve all
>>>  TODO
>>>  >>  comments before its first release.(the number of todo's 
> is very small,6
>>>  > in
>>>  >>  main and 1 in test, and have either to do with method 
> signatures or
>>>  with
>>>  >>  <=jdk1.4 issues.)
>>>  >>  The reason is simple: with a new package this is the best 
> moment to get
>>>  >>  rid of some legacy code from the old plexus-utils which had 
> to stay
>>>  >>  backwards compatible.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  If you think there are other classes/methods which need to be
>>>  discussed,
>>>  >>  please let us know.
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  thanks,
>>>  >>
>>>  >>  Robert
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>   
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>>>  >>  To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>  > 
> [email protected].**org<[email protected]>
>>>  >>  For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >
>>> 
>>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>  For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to