On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 16:02 +0200, Robert Munteanu wrote: > On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 18:06 +0200, Robert Munteanu wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 16:15 +0100, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > > Hi Robert, > > > > > > > ... > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-5455 > > > > https://svn.apache.org/r1726814 ... > > > > > > I have second thoughts about this, sorry ;-) > > > > > > Touching our "sacred" API bundle just for this doesn't feel > > > right...how about creating a new bundles/extensions/sling-commons > > > or > > > sling-util bundle? It will be almost empty for now but that's a > > > good > > > place to add such minor utilities later, without touching > > > "important" > > > bundles. > > > > Moving out of API is fine for me. > > > > Keeping in mind that this will be used by the resourceresolver > > bundle, > > is bundles/extensions the right place ? ( not a rhetorical > > question, > > I > > really don't know ). > > > > As for the bundle name, I'm not a very big fan of commons/util > > since > > they tend to become onfocused, but I don't have a better idea right > > now. > > > > I've reopened SLING-5455 to track the creation of the new bundle. > > I've moved the PathBuilder class to a new org.apache.sling.commons > bundle under bundles/extensions ( maybe it should be under > bundles/commons, since it does not depend on Sling at all? ) > > https://svn.apache.org/r1727058 > > I'll start a release vote early on Friday since I would like to > release > next week the resource resolver bundle ( and other which contain the > work for the new API ).
For the record, we re-re-opened the issue :-) and are leaning towards moving the class back in the api bundle, in a different package ( so it's easy to split out into a different bundle, if we decide to do so in the future ). Any arguments against this would be appreciated soon :-) Thanks, Robert > > Thanks, > > Robert > > > > > > Robert > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > -Bertrand > > >
