On 8/27/01 11:31 AM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
>>
>> does org.apache.velocity.util.StringUtil have a future?
>>
>> IMHO java documentation telling people to write their own replacement
>> methods implies that StringUtils is pretty much dead.
>>
>> On Saturday, August 25, 2001, at 06:24 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/25/01 1:21 PM, "Daniel Rall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> sorry if i'm labouring the point - but why does the deprecation
>>>>> message refer people to a different class when there are methods in
>>>>> StringUtils that already do what's wanted?
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer people to use that other package. IMO, Velocity should
>>>> not be a repository housing code available elsewhere.
>>>
>>> I agree.
>>
>> all the code in StringUtils is either available elsewhere or it's very
>> easy to write (which is basically what the deprecation message tells
>> people to do).
>>
>> i don't have any particular problem freezing StingUtil's - it's just that
>> i'd prefer to know so i don't waste my time preparing patches.
>
> This is the problem as I see it - and I am not really focused in this
> area -
>
> I think that we should deprecate them out - I don't think they belong
> here anyway, especially now that we have a useful home in commons. that
> said, I know Texen depends on them, and we won't screw Texen users -
> maybe we deprecate, migrate to Commons, and then just include the
> commons tools in the vel.jar, like we do with log and oro.
I'm all for using the commons, but I think we should stop rolling other jars
into the vel jar.
> geir
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
