On 6/20/01 1:53 PM, "Daniel Rall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Kasper Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>>>> Be a little more critical about what util classes that ends up in
>>>>> org.apache.turbine.util in the future.
>>>
>>> What critieria do you suggest?
>>>
>> I just want people thinking about perhaps putting classes in Commons, thats
>> where everybody can benefit for them, and we have one less class to worry
>> about.
>> I really think that the number of classes that a project has in propotional
>> to amount of time you have use to get a good overview of the application.
>> Allmost everybody is overwhelmed with the size of turbine allready, off
>> course this should all change to the better when we get all the refactoring
>> done.
>
> I agree. However, I do not have commit to the Commons. I am also
> overwhelmed by the size of the Commons repository--it's a bit of a
> mess because it has like 10 projects living in the same CVS module. I
> find that extremely annoying and hard to use, especially with the
> current overloaded state of cvs.apache.org.
Every committer has automatic access to the sandbox and if you want
to put stuff there. But most of the util code that you have made might
fit under the existing collections package so you could get commit
access fairly easily.
Commons is growing fast definitely ... maybe it could be broken
up into separate repositories. It started out as an experiment
so be patient :-)
> Daniel
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
jvz.
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
