commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From d...@multitask.com.au
Subject Re: GenerateUniqueId.java
Date Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:22:11 GMT
Henri Yandell <bayard@generationjava.com> wrote on 17/12/2002 03:26:08 PM:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> 
> > Henri Yandell <bayard@generationjava.com> wrote on 17/12/2002 12:31:41 
PM:
> >
> > > On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> > > > I'd like to see a move of both of these components to commons.
> > >
> > > I'd like to see there actually be code in util worthy of a commons
> > > project. Currently it's a tiny smattering of classes and while 
there's
> > > nothing to say a project needs a certain size, you'd expect it to be 
a
> > bit
> > > bigger.
> >
> > So when does it become worthy? What's the criteria being applied here?
> 
> Ought to have Unit Tests? More than just 4 or 5 odd classes?

Nah...in that case most of Ant would never have gotten going. It takes a 
while before reasonable unit testing is reached in most projects.

 
> I do have one request here. The emails do not specify who should be 
talked
> to in an effort to fix the build.

? The -dev list gets emailed. The developer(s) should be listening.

> Do the Gump people listen to all the lists they build, is their a gump
> list? I'd normally expect to reply to the email..

Then you would have replied to me :) The nag has me as the from address.

[snip]
> > > -1
> >
> > Some explanation/technical justification please?
> 
> I don't think a project which lacks a stable core of classes should 
become
> a Commons Project.

Core set of classes be damned. It's more important to have developers 
working together on making things better.

> Thus the work at building some functionality into util with the 
identifier
> sub-package.
> 
> > > > 2) Email should be moved to commons proper.
> > >
> > > +0 [assuming it is current and not out of date, and that it is ready
> > > codewise]
> >
> > Can you clarify what 'ready' is?
> 
> i)   Does it have a suitable level of javadoc. Not enough for an actual
>      release, but the bare minimum.
Who cares about javadoc if there isn't usage documentation. For a 'common' 
component, isn't that more important?

> ii)  Does it have maturity. That is, has it spent some time in the 
sandbox
>      while the developers use it, modified versions or extended versions
>      in other projects.
Maybe the code's been used to death before getting into commons?

> iii) Does the project contain enough in the way of Unit Tests to show 
that
>      the developers are serious about testing.
Is this a particular %age Code coverage?

> iv)  Is there a community, or is it a single developer. Does it have 
link
>      to another project which will show a scope for its community 
growth.
> v)   Does it have a webpage yet?
Web pages are easy to generate....and harder to keep up to date. Check 
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/, it's got old components listed. Or 
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang.html which has virtually no 
documentation on using the library. Which sort of defeats the purpose of 
making a reusable library....

[snip]
> > <devils-advocate>
> > Ok, but for what purpose. It's obvious no developers are building it 
from
> > source on a regular basis. Given you'd rather not move it to commons, 
why
> > don't we just delete it and move the code that's needed back where 
they
> > came from?
> > </devils-advocate>
> 
> Definitely a good view. It seems there are two options, kill it or find
> functionality for it.
> 
> I'd say there are 7 bits in there:
> 
> 1) BitField  => Collections possibly. or Lang.
Yep.
> 2) Interpolator => Kill.
> 3) StopWatch ?
> 4) WordWrapUtils => Lang's sandbox. It's a break off of StringUtils 
which
> was not very stable at release time.
Sounds like it belongs back in StringUtils.

> 5) XmlUtils => Kill.
> 6) identifier/ => Find somewhere
> 7) GenerateUniqueId => Help commons-email with how to use identifier, or
> commons-email contains this code
I've fixed commons-email to use identifier.

I suppose the hassle is the lack of direction about util. It seems to be a 
dumping ground, which, IMHO, aint such a good thing. I was under the vague 
impression it, like lang, was a collection of helpers to go with 
java.util.....

--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog:      http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message