Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 49752 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2002 00:38:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Feb 2002 00:38:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 673 invoked by uid 97); 22 Feb 2002 00:38:50 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 657 invoked by uid 97); 22 Feb 2002 00:38:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 632 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2002 00:38:49 -0000 Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:38:33 -0600 (CST) From: "Michael A. Smith" X-X-Sender: iammichael@champion.sslsecure.com To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [COLLECTIONS] 2.0 Release digest 02/21/2002 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 bayard@generationjava.com wrote: > Can a movement of those classes in Util which are seen as Collections > classes be made before 2.0? Probably. I don't think we have a timetable for the 2.0 collections release at the moment. In fact, I don't think we've even reached a consensus on what would be going into the 2.0 release. > It seems to mainly be a check from Collections that yes the Utils ones are > copys, and then an import of StringStack and BufferCache or some such. > Maybe a rewrite of BufferCache to fit it in. collections.CollectionUtils and util.CollectionsUtils look very different. On cursory glance BufferCache is pretty much the same as LRUCache, so we may just need add the couple of methods that BufferCache has which LRU does not and drop BufferCache altogether. > I may not understand what will be in Collections 2.0 well enough yet > though. Is it everything in Collections, or do you choose those components > that are worthy? everything in collections would get tagged as 2.0 and released together. > Would transferring the above componetns and considering the location or > compare/ and lru/ sub-pakcages cause a problem with Collections 2.0? I think this is still to be evaluated. regards, michael -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: