Re: [Lang][Util] Merge lang and util?

[Ola Berg <ol...@arkitema.se>]

>For commons to work, each
>time a bit of code is committed there needs to be 
>thought to say - is this
>the right place for it, or can it be even more 
>generic.

Stephen, you are absolutely right about what shared low level general code can do, especially when it comes to the sharing of generic interfaces (Factory, Predicate etc).

But my experience is that not all are used to think in terms of \"trying to solve the general problem and put the solution somewhere else\". Especially if the solution emerges from solving a particular problem. You can\'t just put such a solution outside your own project\'s package structure, without hearing the other\'s opinion about it. Others might have other requirements for that same type of functionality (like a Transformer that throws declared exceptions for instance). That is a developement process in itself.

Maybe one has to show by example what it would mean to outfactor general classes/patterns/interfaces into a lang/util/base package. 

/O

--------------------
ola.berg@arkitema.se
0733 - 99 99 17

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: [Lang][Util] Merge lang and util?

[Juozas Baliuka <ba...@centras.lt>]

Hi Stephen,

I do not understand this, but the most of patches and ideas are ignored from
"outside".
You are commiter in commons and I believe you have "karma" on sandbox.
Start new a project and  we will vote then it will be ready.

> From: "Ola Berg" <ol...@arkitema.se>
> > Maybe one has to show by example what it would mean to outfactor general
> classes/patterns/interfaces into a lang/util/base package.
>
> I'd love to - new sandbox project 'core' pulling code in from lang, util
and
> others. But then I'd get shouted down for forking the codebase (as per the
> reflect thread). At the moment its a tad fustrating - I've got lots of
> ideas, lots of potential code, but no project is willing to take them.
Maybe
> it'll sort itslef out, but at the moment I've got real doubts.
>
> Stephen
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: [Lang][Util] Merge lang and util?

[Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>]

How about a list of what you're suggesting for a Core project?

I see nothing in Util which would apply, except maybe BitField.

Are you against the concept of mapping Commons projects to Java.*
packages? Would you prefer Commons.Net, Commons.IO, Commons.Lang and
Commons.Collections to all form Commons.Core? Maybe Commons.Codec as well?

I'm not that up to date on the Transformers/Predicates/Comparators issue,
I think it is due to a series of chain-like classes all being the same
generic thing, and that you'd like a commons set of interface like things
to be in a Core package.

Plus some Pattern like things.

So far the main idea I've been reacting to is merging Lang and Util. This
would be bad when you look at the contents of Util as really those
packages are Misc. So I think the concept you're suggesting would be to
rename Util to Misc, then give the Lang proposal the ability to take in
generic components that are not related to IO/Collections/Net etc. Doing
this would invalidate the name Lang and see it renamed Core.

??

Hen


 On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:

> I'd love to - new sandbox project 'core' pulling code in from lang, util and
> others. But then I'd get shouted down for forking the codebase (as per the
> reflect thread). At the moment its a tad fustrating - I've got lots of
> ideas, lots of potential code, but no project is willing to take them. Maybe
> it'll sort itslef out, but at the moment I've got real doubts.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: [Lang][Util] Merge lang and util?

[Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>]

From: "Ola Berg" <ol...@arkitema.se>
> Maybe one has to show by example what it would mean to outfactor general
classes/patterns/interfaces into a lang/util/base package.

I'd love to - new sandbox project 'core' pulling code in from lang, util and
others. But then I'd get shouted down for forking the codebase (as per the
reflect thread). At the moment its a tad fustrating - I've got lots of
ideas, lots of potential code, but no project is willing to take them. Maybe
it'll sort itslef out, but at the moment I've got real doubts.

Stephen


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>