Stefano Bagnara ha scritto:
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I created a branch to commit the code I worked on in the last 2 days.
The branch included commits to fix:
MIME4J-50 - InputBuffer to extend FilterInputStream
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-50
MIME4J-52 - Infinite loop when nested multipart is missing end boundary
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-52
MIME4J-56 - In nested multiparts outer boundaries are not recognized
when
parsing inner multiparts
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-56
when the branch was mooted, AIUI the idea was to allow people to
easily understand the proposed repackaging. now it's turned into a
development branch. i'm not impressed.
sorry Robert, I opened 2 different branches.
the package reorganization branch is only demonstrative and there is
another topic about it.
This one instead was to let me study how to refactor the InputBuffer and
to fix the related issues. I didn't do this in the main tree simply
because I don't know who is working there and if people had work in
progress patches, so I preferred to simply work somewhere else and to
propose a merge later.
And it also include the stream renaming proposed in the thread "[mime4j]
BufferingInputStreamAdaptor => BufferedInputStreamFilter".
Please note that MIME4J-56 require a fix even if we don't want
MIME4J-50 but
my fix depends I have not a fix for it without first applying
MIME4J-50, so
this is why I'm proposing this "merge" instead of single patches.
I'd like to merge the work from this branch to trunk and to remove the
branch ASAP as we also have a bunch of new critical bugs to be fixed in
trunk before we can try a release.
right or wrong, please merge it now
Robert, can you explain me what's wrong with me having created a branch
for the stream-refactoring? I'm not sure I understand the issue and I
don't want to make the same mistake in future.
Just to make it clear the way I work/worked:
- I had to put my hands in the code to understand if the InputBuffer
change I proposed was good and how it could have been done, so I worked
on it locally (on a different folder from the one I used to test the
repackaging). The same applies to the repackaging: IMHO discussing
similar stuff without touching the code is most often that not a waste
of time because most time there are issues you find only when you touch
the code.
- While I was working on that code I also found some bugs and I add new
test messages (to trunk) to prove the bugs.
- I also found a solution (based on the new code in the branch) to one
of the bugs: I would have proposed a patch for trunk but I didn't know
how to solve it in trunk (furthermore the patch for the issue required
review by mime4j experts, as I'm a newbie wrt this product).
- I thought it was better to commit the code somewhere (a branch)
instead of leaving this stuff in my pc so people could have better
reviewed what I worked on.
- I didn't work in trunk directly because you was the main developer
there and I didn't know if you had uncommitted code or any idea about
trunk that conflicted with what I worked on, so I chose a branch (in
jSPF, for example, I would have acted differently and worked on trunk).
- I wrote 2 proposals and didn't apply anything waiting for feedback
(expecially your).
http://markmail.org/message/yp2bhma7u5hutjqn
http://markmail.org/message/mhhvtir27gifcvdy
http://markmail.org/message/k6ccmng5e4k6nfjk
- I'm willing to merge the work from both branches if there is agreement
they are good and I'm willing to handle conflicts created in the mean
time (you can see that even my 2 branches conflict each other so to
apply both I will have anyway to manually reproduce the changes of at
least one of them, I don't have problem with that).
- If you have issues with the code in the branch feel free to complain:
I committed to a branch but it is nothing more than a proposed patch
waiting for approval (we can svn remove it at any moment)
- If you have issues with the replace of the src folder from a branch
(please explain them) I can apply the merge by diff+commit or I can even
reproduce commit by commit the work done there (having committed to a
branch allow us to do this now, if I simply did the work on my local
folder it would be hard now to split the change in the various granular
commits).
Please let me understand what was wrong with this because I thought I
was simply helping the mime4j project and I was not creating any issue.
If there is anything in the steps above I should have done differently
please let's discuss them, because this will be helpful for future
collaboration.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
