You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Randy Speh <rw...@yahoo.com> on 2002/07/09 15:37:21 UTC
XMLConfiguration
Does anyone know the status of the XMLConfiguration
class in the jakarta-commmons-sandbox configuration
package?
Thanks,
Randy Speh
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into the wild
Posted by Juozas Baliuka <ba...@centras.lt>.
+1
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <co...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 6:05 PM
Subject: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into the
wild
>
> I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
> Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox.
> Most of these had been already released under Excalibur, so the code is
> definately production ready.
>
> Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
>
> Committers, please cast your votes.
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> 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: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
costinm@covalent.net wrote:
> +1
>
> Please check the files with 'short' licence - I noticed bzip2 for
> example.
Oops, thank you, will do :-)
> I'm a bit confused about the package names - zip and tar don't
> fit very well in 'compress', and the main package is a bit too
> mixed and confusing ( FileUtil/FileUtils, file tools and encoding
> tools, etc - better organization would help ).
>
> I hope those will be sorted before a release - but overall I think
> it would be good to move them in commons.
Ok, let's sort them out now :-)
Tar is not ok for compress?
Then... io.archive? Hmmm...
Zip is ok in compress I think, what would you propose?
Other tips?
> Looking at it from a tomcat commiter perspective - the
> RecycleBufferedInputStream that we use to avoid creation of IS may fit
> well, and we could use commons-io and deprecate some of the duplicated
> classes we have.
Cool! :-D
Give me the classmanes-locations and I'll put copy them in.
> I hope some stuff from ant might migrate here too.
Much of the code was in Ant before, but as you know Ant
wants/needs to create itself with not much dependency
on other stuff...we'll see what can be practically done
:-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by co...@covalent.net.
+1
Please check the files with 'short' licence - I noticed bzip2 for
example.
I'm a bit confused about the package names - zip and tar don't
fit very well in 'compress', and the main package is a bit too
mixed and confusing ( FileUtil/FileUtils, file tools and encoding
tools, etc - better organization would help ).
I hope those will be sorted before a release - but overall I think
it would be good to move them in commons.
Looking at it from a tomcat commiter perspective - the
RecycleBufferedInputStream that we use to avoid creation of IS may fit
well, and we could use commons-io and deprecate some of the duplicated
classes we have. I hope some stuff from ant might migrate here too.
Costin
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
> Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox.
> Most of these had been already released under Excalibur, so the code is
> definately production ready.
>
> Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
>
> Committers, please cast your votes.
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> -1
> Reasons:
> 1) I want to see certain things sorted before promotion
> 2) I want a new vote once those things are done that doesn't have excessive
> discussion on the vote thread
> Thus I am really +1, my -1 is temporary.
>
> I will detail the action points in a separate thread (no vote header).
Ok, (1) makes sense.
(2) is not needed, since as soon as (1) is done, the -1 doesn't stand
anymore and no extra vote is needed.
We'll vote on the specific things you want sorted out though.
Now you have the ball ;-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into the wild
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
-1
Reasons:
1) I want to see certain things sorted before promotion
2) I want a new vote once those things are done that doesn't have excessive
discussion on the vote thread
Thus I am really +1, my -1 is temporary.
I will detail the action points in a separate thread (no vote header).
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <co...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
>
> Henri Yandell wrote:
> > Linked slightly to some conversation in [lang]. I've noticed that the IO
> > package appears to have some issues in its utility files.
> >
> > 1) Some are named xxxUtil others are named xxxUtils, with no apparant
> > convention.
> >
> > 2) There is a FileUtil and FileUtils.
> >
> > It seems to me that getting the filenames and directories they live in
> > right is one of the most important things before migrating to a new cvs
> > location to allow the audit trail to remain as obvious as possible.
> > I'm assuming these issues would need to be dealt with before release.
>
> Sure.
> Since you definately know more than me on these conventions (and since I
> haven't followed the one on land ;-), could you please summarize the
> results and propose the giudelines and changes?
>
> It would be great, and I'd make the change in no time :-)
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> 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>
[IO] Preparing for promotion of io
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
At present, there are methods in both FileUtil and FileUtils that do similar
things, but differently. These classes should be merged (according to the
naming convention, see below).
IMHO, each method in _all_ IO classes needs to be examined to see if:
- it adds benefit
- it fits best in that class, or whether a separate Utils class would be
better
- it is a duplicate
- it is tested
- it should be public, or could be private/package scoped
- it handles nulls/illegal arguments/exceptions consistently
- licence is correct in every file
This is the process undertaken in Lang. As a result, some methods/classes
have been moved to the Util backwater, some methods were broken out of
Strings into their own classes. And some minor new functionality was added.
For example in IO, it may be worth considering if the file filters should be
in their own package. Or maybe inner classes of a factory FileFilterUtils
class. Also a CompressUtils might be useful to provide a front end to the
various compression schemes.
IO needs a licence file in the IO folder, not ../licence (plus change to
build.xml).
Naming conventions are still under discussion at Lang. I suggest that IO
devotees should input into that discussion to try to be consistent accross
Commons.
Deprecated methods should be removed before promotion. Now is the time to
take the pain, or you may be left with them forevermore.
I may be able to help with some of this, but I am definitely pushed for time
at present ;-)
Stephen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
> Linked slightly to some conversation in [lang]. I've noticed that the IO
> package appears to have some issues in its utility files.
>
> 1) Some are named xxxUtil others are named xxxUtils, with no apparant
> convention.
>
> 2) There is a FileUtil and FileUtils.
>
> It seems to me that getting the filenames and directories they live in
> right is one of the most important things before migrating to a new cvs
> location to allow the audit trail to remain as obvious as possible.
> I'm assuming these issues would need to be dealt with before release.
Sure.
Since you definately know more than me on these conventions (and since I
haven't followed the one on land ;-), could you please summarize the
results and propose the giudelines and changes?
It would be great, and I'd make the change in no time :-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Linked slightly to some conversation in [lang]. I've noticed that the IO
package appears to have some issues in its utility files.
1) Some are named xxxUtil others are named xxxUtils, with no apparant
convention.
2) There is a FileUtil and FileUtils.
It seems to me that getting the filenames and directories they live in
right is one of the most important things before migrating to a new cvs
location to allow the audit trail to remain as obvious as possible.
I'm assuming these issues would need to be dealt with before release.
Hen
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
> Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox.
> Most of these had been already released under Excalibur, so the code is
> definately production ready.
>
> Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
>
> Committers, please cast your votes.
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> 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: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into the wild
Posted by Juozas Baliuka <ba...@centras.lt>.
I think test failures must not be problem to promote some componet,
I is good if problems are visible, but it can't be realeased some test
fails.
> Did you get the unit tests working? I still get failures and errors,
> though some of those are just deprecation warnings.
>
> I'm against something being promoted with failing unit tests, so -0.
> Nothing against Commons.IO, just a policy belief that things should be in
> a proven state when they make the move. That way the old atticed version
> in the sandbox is a working version.
>
> Hen
>
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> >
> > I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
> > Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox.
> > Most of these had been already released under Excalibur, so the code is
> > definately production ready.
> >
> > Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
> >
> > Committers, please cast your votes.
> >
> > --
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> > - verba volant, scripta manent -
> > (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
> I rm -r'd the io dir and cvs checked out again. Same errors in three tar
> tests:
:-/
These are exactly the tests that failed because of ant copying the test
files with filtering on...
Please do these checks for me:
1. the test files in the target/tests/** are correct and are the same as
the ones in src/test/** ? (should be)
2.In build.xml, do you have (should be)
<target name="compile.tests" depends="compile"
description="Compile unit test cases">
<javac srcdir="${test.home}"
destdir="${build.home}/tests"
debug="${compile.debug}"
deprecation="${compile.deprecation}"
optimize="${compile.optimize}">
<classpath refid="test.classpath"/>
</javac>
<copy todir="${build.home}/tests" filtering="off">
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<fileset dir="${test.home}" excludes="**/*.java"/>
</copy>
</target>
Sorry for the inconvenience, thank you.
> [Platform: Apple Powerbook OS X 10.1.x Apple JVM 1.3.1]
>
> [junit] Testcase:
> testReadPosixTar(org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase)::
> FAILED
> [junit] Entry size expected:<652> but was:<666>
> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Entry size
> expected:<652> but was:<666>
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:51)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:234)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:68)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:121)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.checkEntry(TarTestCase.java:148)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.compareTar(TarTestCase.java:175)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.testReadPosixTar(TarTestCase.java:77)
>
> [junit] Testcase:
> testReadGnuTar(org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase):: FAILED
> [junit] Entry size expected:<652> but was:<666>
> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Entry size
> expected:<652> but was:<666>
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:51)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:234)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:68)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:121)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.checkEntry(TarTestCase.java:148)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.compareTar(TarTestCase.java:175)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.testReadGnuTar(TarTestCase.java:83)
>
> [junit] Testcase:
> testWritePosixTar(org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase)::
> FAILED
> [junit] Tar files Equal
> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Tar files Equal
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:51)
> [junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:38)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.testWritePosixTar(TarTestCase.java:105)
>
> Hen
>
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>
>>The failures were because of the fact that the test files were copied
>>with filter on, so were corrupted.
>>
>>Please do a clean and retry, if you still get errors please let me know.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
I rm -r'd the io dir and cvs checked out again. Same errors in three tar
tests:
[Platform: Apple Powerbook OS X 10.1.x Apple JVM 1.3.1]
[junit] Testcase:
testReadPosixTar(org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase)::
FAILED
[junit] Entry size expected:<652> but was:<666>
[junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Entry size
expected:<652> but was:<666>
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:51)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:234)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:68)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:121)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.checkEntry(TarTestCase.java:148)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.compareTar(TarTestCase.java:175)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.testReadPosixTar(TarTestCase.java:77)
[junit] Testcase:
testReadGnuTar(org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase):: FAILED
[junit] Entry size expected:<652> but was:<666>
[junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Entry size
expected:<652> but was:<666>
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:51)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:234)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:68)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:121)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.checkEntry(TarTestCase.java:148)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.compareTar(TarTestCase.java:175)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.testReadGnuTar(TarTestCase.java:83)
[junit] Testcase:
testWritePosixTar(org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase)::
FAILED
[junit] Tar files Equal
[junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Tar files Equal
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:51)
[junit] at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:38)
[junit] at
org.apache.commons.io.compress.tar.TarTestCase.testWritePosixTar(TarTestCase.java:105)
Hen
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> The failures were because of the fact that the test files were copied
> with filter on, so were corrupted.
>
> Please do a clean and retry, if you still get errors please let me know.
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
> Did you get the unit tests working?
Yes.
> I still get failures and errors,
:-/
The failures were because of the fact that the test files were copied
with filter on, so were corrupted.
Please do a clean and retry, if you still get errors please let me know.
> though some of those are just deprecation warnings.
Oh yes, I usually like to keep deprecations on to keep it known to me ;-)
I think that it's best to remove the deprecations alltogether now that
things have moved, I'll do it.
Oh, and BTW they are in the testcases.
> I'm against something being promoted with failing unit tests, so -0.
> Nothing against Commons.IO, just a policy belief that things should be in
> a proven state when they make the move. That way the old atticed version
> in the sandbox is a working version.
Well, I would -1 i myself if it was like you say. I won't ever make the
move till all test pass.
Ah, and just nuking the test won't do I guess ;-)
Please try the tests again and let me know.
Thank you.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into the wild
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
If we have deprecated classes/methods, they should be removed.
If we are using deprecated methods, then make sure it is safe
to change them. There is one example of a deprecated method
I ran across where the method was deprecated in JDK 1.4--not
something we want to force support for right now.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henri Yandell [mailto:bayard@generationjava.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 1:51 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List; nicolaken@apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of
> the Sandbox into the wild
>
>
> Did you get the unit tests working? I still get failures and
> errors, though some of those are just deprecation warnings.
>
> I'm against something being promoted with failing unit tests,
> so -0. Nothing against Commons.IO, just a policy belief that
> things should be in a proven state when they make the move.
> That way the old atticed version in the sandbox is a working version.
>
> Hen
>
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> >
> > I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
> > Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox. Most of these had been
> > already released under Excalibur, so the code is definately
> production
> > ready.
> >
> > Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons
> > package.
> >
> > Committers, please cast your votes.
> >
> > --
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> > - verba volant, scripta manent -
> > (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For
> additional commands,
> e-mail:
> > <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-> unsubscribe@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: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Did you get the unit tests working? I still get failures and errors,
though some of those are just deprecation warnings.
I'm against something being promoted with failing unit tests, so -0.
Nothing against Commons.IO, just a policy belief that things should be in
a proven state when they make the move. That way the old atticed version
in the sandbox is a working version.
Hen
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
> Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox.
> Most of these had been already released under Excalibur, so the code is
> definately production ready.
>
> Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
>
> Committers, please cast your votes.
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> 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: [VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into
the wild
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
>
> Committers, please cast your votes.
+1
regards,
michael
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
[VOTE][IO] Promotion of the io packages out of the Sandbox into the
wild
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
I've finished the move of the io, bzip2, zip and tar packages from
Avalon Excalibur to the Commons Sandbox.
Most of these had been already released under Excalibur, so the code is
definately production ready.
Therefore I propose to make the io package a top-level Commons package.
Committers, please cast your votes.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>