You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cloudstack.apache.org by Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <gu...@apache.org> on 2021/09/13 14:54:10 UTC
[VOTE] Standard string lib
Hi All,
We had a discussion about standardizing the string libs we're using (https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r806cd10b3de645c150e5e0e3d845c5a380a700197143f57f0834d758%40%3Cdev.cloudstack.apache.org%3E).
As I proposed, I'm opening this voting thread to see if all are in favor of using "commons.lang3" as the String standard library and for String operations not convered on "commons.lang3", we use our StringUtils. Then, if the vote passes, I will create the PR to address this change in the code base by removing unnecessary libraries, and changing the code to use "commons.lang3".
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Best regards,
Daniel
Re: [VOTE] Standard string lib
Posted by Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <gu...@apache.org>.
Hi Mario, thanks for the reply.
This was sent to the wrong mail list. If you want to join the voting, please, follow the official thread in DEV mail list: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rf8c21f7d8af2c85369c7ce2f8205dc8f1b24ebd0a24417ba501b79a0%40%3Cdev.cloudstack.apache.org%3E
Best regards,
Daniel
On 2021/09/13 14:58:04, mario juliano grande-balletta <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> yes, go for it!
>
> good idea
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2021-09-13 at 14:54 +0000, Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > We had a discussion about standardizing the string libs we're using (https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r806cd10b3de645c150e5e0e3d845c5a380a700197143f57f0834d758%40%3Cdev.cloudstack.apache.org%3E).
> >
> > As I proposed, I'm opening this voting thread to see if all are in favor of using "commons.lang3" as the String standard library and for String operations not convered on "commons.lang3", we use our StringUtils. Then, if the vote passes, I will create the PR to address this change in the code base by removing unnecessary libraries, and changing the code to use "commons.lang3".
> >
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Daniel
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Standard string lib
Posted by mario juliano grande-balletta <ma...@gmail.com>.
+1
yes, go for it!
good idea
On Mon, 2021-09-13 at 14:54 +0000, Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We had a discussion about standardizing the string libs we're using (https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r806cd10b3de645c150e5e0e3d845c5a380a700197143f57f0834d758%40%3Cdev.cloudstack.apache.org%3E).
>
> As I proposed, I'm opening this voting thread to see if all are in favor of using "commons.lang3" as the String standard library and for String operations not convered on "commons.lang3", we use our StringUtils. Then, if the vote passes, I will create the PR to address this change in the code base by removing unnecessary libraries, and changing the code to use "commons.lang3".
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Standard string lib
Posted by Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <dv...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
I sent it to the wrong mail list, please disregard this thread, thanks.
Best regards,
Daniel
On 13/09/2021 11:54, Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We had a discussion about standardizing the string libs we're using (https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r806cd10b3de645c150e5e0e3d845c5a380a700197143f57f0834d758%40%3Cdev.cloudstack.apache.org%3E).
>
> As I proposed, I'm opening this voting thread to see if all are in favor of using "commons.lang3" as the String standard library and for String operations not convered on "commons.lang3", we use our StringUtils. Then, if the vote passes, I will create the PR to address this change in the code base by removing unnecessary libraries, and changing the code to use "commons.lang3".
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>