You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@commons.apache.org by di...@multitask.com.au on 2004/05/18 01:42:54 UTC
[jelly] VOTE: Use BeanUtils.copyProperty (Was Re: [Jelly] Use of
BeanUtils.setProperty() method)
Geoff, I'm all in favour of your proposal and now call for a vote on it:
Accept Geoff's patch:
http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg06871.html
[ ] +1 (Agree and will help)
[ ] +0 (Agree)
[ ] -1 (Don't agree and here's why)
Here's my +1.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Geoffrey Arnold <ge...@geoffreyarnold.com> wrote on 18/05/2004 01:40:46
AM:
> A couple of weeks ago I posted a message concerning the implications of
> the BeanUtils.setProperty() method:
>
>
http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg06999.html
>
> I subsequently submitted a patch which resolves the issue, including a
> custom Converter implementation which aims to maintain backwards
> compatibility with the current behavior:
>
>
http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg06871.html
>
> There were concerns that switching from BeanUtils.setProperty() to
> BeanUtils.copyProperty() might cause unforeseen problems with existing
> scripts due to differences in logic between those methods, but without
> an example script this remains only a hypothesis.
>
> The discussion has since ceased, with no clear resolution. I would like
> to restart the thread in the hopes of gaining some closure to the issue.
>
> Many thanks.
> Geoff.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [jelly] VOTE: Use BeanUtils.copyProperty (Was Re: [Jelly] Use of
BeanUtils.setProperty() method)
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
I think we can do some tests once Maven works with Jelly again to verify
that this is WAD.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote on
19/05/2004 06:05:51 AM:
> though it is just a hypothesis, the hypothesis does comes from a
> beanutils committer who knows the code involved pretty well. i know
> that there are significant changes in the ways that the two methods
> work but whether any current users are likely to be bitten by this
> behaviour, i don't know.
>
> but i'd say that should be up to the folks who've know the jelly users
> best to decide whether this is a worry for them or not.
>
> so i'm voting 0
>
> - robert
>
> On 18 May 2004, at 08:48, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
>
> > +1 as well if even mavenners say it's not a problem.
> > This is where I was fearing!
> >
> > paul
> >
> > On 18-May-04, at 01:42 Uhr, dion_gillard@multitask.com.au wrote:
> >
> >> Geoff, I'm all in favour of your proposal and now call for a vote on
> >> it:
> >>
> >> Accept Geoff's patch:
> >>
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
> >> msg06871.html
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 (Agree and will help)
> >> [ ] +0 (Agree)
> >> [ ] -1 (Don't agree and here's why)
> >>
> >> Here's my +1.
> >> --
> >> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Geoffrey Arnold <ge...@geoffreyarnold.com> wrote on 18/05/2004
> >> 01:40:46
> >> AM:
> >>
> >>> A couple of weeks ago I posted a message concerning the implications
> >>> of
> >>> the BeanUtils.setProperty() method:
> >>>
> >>>
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
> >> msg06999.html
> >>>
> >>> I subsequently submitted a patch which resolves the issue, including
> >>> a
> >>> custom Converter implementation which aims to maintain backwards
> >>> compatibility with the current behavior:
> >>>
> >>>
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
> >> msg06871.html
> >>>
> >>> There were concerns that switching from BeanUtils.setProperty() to
> >>> BeanUtils.copyProperty() might cause unforeseen problems with
> >>> existing
> >>> scripts due to differences in logic between those methods, but
> >>> without
> >>> an example script this remains only a hypothesis.
> >>>
> >>> The discussion has since ceased, with no clear resolution. I would
> >>> like
> >>
> >>> to restart the thread in the hopes of gaining some closure to the
> >>> issue.
> >>>
> >>> Many thanks.
> >>> Geoff.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail:
commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [jelly] VOTE: Use BeanUtils.copyProperty (Was Re: [Jelly] Use of BeanUtils.setProperty() method)
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
though it is just a hypothesis, the hypothesis does comes from a
beanutils committer who knows the code involved pretty well. i know
that there are significant changes in the ways that the two methods
work but whether any current users are likely to be bitten by this
behaviour, i don't know.
but i'd say that should be up to the folks who've know the jelly users
best to decide whether this is a worry for them or not.
so i'm voting 0
- robert
On 18 May 2004, at 08:48, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> +1 as well if even mavenners say it's not a problem.
> This is where I was fearing!
>
> paul
>
> On 18-May-04, at 01:42 Uhr, dion_gillard@multitask.com.au wrote:
>
>> Geoff, I'm all in favour of your proposal and now call for a vote on
>> it:
>>
>> Accept Geoff's patch:
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
>> msg06871.html
>>
>> [ ] +1 (Agree and will help)
>> [ ] +0 (Agree)
>> [ ] -1 (Don't agree and here's why)
>>
>> Here's my +1.
>> --
>> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
>>
>>
>>
>> Geoffrey Arnold <ge...@geoffreyarnold.com> wrote on 18/05/2004
>> 01:40:46
>> AM:
>>
>>> A couple of weeks ago I posted a message concerning the implications
>>> of
>>> the BeanUtils.setProperty() method:
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
>> msg06999.html
>>>
>>> I subsequently submitted a patch which resolves the issue, including
>>> a
>>> custom Converter implementation which aims to maintain backwards
>>> compatibility with the current behavior:
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
>> msg06871.html
>>>
>>> There were concerns that switching from BeanUtils.setProperty() to
>>> BeanUtils.copyProperty() might cause unforeseen problems with
>>> existing
>>> scripts due to differences in logic between those methods, but
>>> without
>>> an example script this remains only a hypothesis.
>>>
>>> The discussion has since ceased, with no clear resolution. I would
>>> like
>>
>>> to restart the thread in the hopes of gaining some closure to the
>>> issue.
>>>
>>> Many thanks.
>>> Geoff.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [jelly] VOTE: Use BeanUtils.copyProperty (Was Re: [Jelly] Use of BeanUtils.setProperty() method)
Posted by Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org>.
+1 as well if even mavenners say it's not a problem.
This is where I was fearing!
paul
On 18-May-04, at 01:42 Uhr, dion_gillard@multitask.com.au wrote:
> Geoff, I'm all in favour of your proposal and now call for a vote on
> it:
>
> Accept Geoff's patch:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
> msg06871.html
>
> [ ] +1 (Agree and will help)
> [ ] +0 (Agree)
> [ ] -1 (Don't agree and here's why)
>
> Here's my +1.
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
>
>
>
> Geoffrey Arnold <ge...@geoffreyarnold.com> wrote on 18/05/2004
> 01:40:46
> AM:
>
>> A couple of weeks ago I posted a message concerning the implications
>> of
>> the BeanUtils.setProperty() method:
>>
>>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
> msg06999.html
>>
>> I subsequently submitted a patch which resolves the issue, including a
>> custom Converter implementation which aims to maintain backwards
>> compatibility with the current behavior:
>>
>>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-user@jakarta.apache.org/
> msg06871.html
>>
>> There were concerns that switching from BeanUtils.setProperty() to
>> BeanUtils.copyProperty() might cause unforeseen problems with existing
>> scripts due to differences in logic between those methods, but without
>> an example script this remains only a hypothesis.
>>
>> The discussion has since ceased, with no clear resolution. I would
>> like
>
>> to restart the thread in the hopes of gaining some closure to the
>> issue.
>>
>> Many thanks.
>> Geoff.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org