On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 23:54 -0700, Henri Yandell wrote: > CLI 2.0 I don't see any time soon (ever) unless someone gets a big urge.
What is needed to move 2.0 to release? Given that the policy decision was made to shift any new activity to 2.0, saying 2.0 is defunct is equivalent to saying Commons CLI is defunct. Can I suggest that 2.0-SNAPSHOT could happily be released into the snapshot repository to give things a kick start? Alternatively, the decision to move to 2.0 could be rescinded and 1.x treated as the mainline. However, I had understood that the 1.x architecture was fundamentally inferior to the 2.x architecture. > CLI 1.2 I have on my list as a 'sometime soon' along with the next > Collections 3.x and Codec 1.x - looking at it I think it could go very > easily, none of the 4 tickets are blocked (ignoring that CLI-137 is a > painful one to close as WONTFIX). I think there is more to CLI-137 than is currently listed. From memory (I will try and dig up the test cases) processing multiple options (e.g. -D) fails to work in CLI 1.1. So unless someone has fixed that I would deem 1.2 as unusable just as 1.1 is :-( This is actually an opportune moment for something to happen with COmmons CLI as there are gumblings again about still having to use CLI 1.0 for Groovy. Current favourite is to switch to a new CLI package that has some energy, i.e. someone is actually working on it :-) Currently mooted to move to are JSAP or JOpt. If however there was a Commons CLI 1.2 and it fixed the bugs we found in the Groovy project that mean that 1.1 is basically broken and unusable, then that would be great. Shifting a version of a package is easier than shifting packages. -- Russel. ==================================================== Dr Russel Winder Partner Concertant LLP t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203 41 Buckmaster Road, f: +44 8700 516 084 London SW11 1EN, UK. m: +44 7770 465 077
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
