Anyone else care to comment? Joda Time and Scala Time are both licensed Apache, so I don't think there would be any issues there, but this would be a significant change. Would anyone here strongly prefer to stay with java.util.Date?
Derek On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Charles F. Munat <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 for joda or scala time if it's not too disruptive > > Chas. > > Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: > >>> Also, the LiftRules.parseDate function currently does DateTime > >>> parsing, so I would have to make a breaking change to rename it to > >>> parseDateTime and add new parseDate and parseTime (and associated > >>> format methods). Thoughts? > >> I think this is the right solution. Don't know how much will break > >> because of this though. But hey, if we're breaking things anyway, why > >> not put in Joda time (or maybe scala-timehttp:// > github.com/jorgeortiz85/scala-time/tree/master;-) > > > > Although not belonging to breaking changers camp, breaking changes are > > great when it's for a cause. IMHO, scala time is a darn good cause and > > worth the break! > > > > Cheers, Indrajit > > > >> /Jeppe > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
