Re: [PROPOSAL/VOTE] Digester Package

[Scott Sanders]

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

> "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote:
> 
>> "Craig R. McClanahan" wrote:
>> 
>>> One nitpick along with my +1 -- the property setting stuff relies on the
>>> code that is now in "beanutils" in Commons already.
>>> 
>> 
>> Would it make any sense to move it into beanutils?
>> 
> 
> 
> Ok - as a name, no - but can we glom them into a bigger utils package?
> 
> ...utils.beanutils
> ...utils.collections
> ...utils.XXXXX

I just don't like utils.  It is the catch all when you can't think of 
anything else.

I think that collections can stand on its own, IMHO.  That does not mean 
that I am against them being together.  The code base is obviously not 
large enough to prevent easy releases, yet. ;-)

The beanutils/digester makes sense to go together, IMHO.

One might argue that you can package all of commons in a 'mega-release', 
but that is just packaging at a higher level, the sub-sub-projects would 
still operate 'on their own', right?

Scott Sanders