commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From steve cohen <>
Subject Re: [NET] VMSFTPEntryParser bug?
Date Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:43:38 GMT
Ant's new baseline (as of Ant 1.6) is J2SE 1.2.  I'm in basic agreement with 
Daniel's suggestions, although I myself have no experience whatever with nio.  
I guess I should bone up on it.

On Wednesday 31 December 2003 12:09 am, Daniel F. Savarese wrote:
> In message <>, steve cohen
> writes
> >failing but on a different line.  I'm not sure what platform Jeff is on
> > when he did the build, but I think I should rewrite this test in a way
> > that doesn't assume any particular order since this seems to be
> > JDK-implementation dependent.  The JavaDoc for HashMap specifies no order
> > that should be expected for HashMap.values(), nor for HashMap.keySet()
> > for that matter.  We could probably achieve a dependable order by using a
> > TreeMap.keySet() instead.
> +1
> >However, this brings up the larger question, of what the target platform
> > for commons-net is.  I dimly remember that it being java 1.1.  This is
> > why I went through the annoying exercise of creating the FTPFileList and
> > FTPFileIterator classes based on java-1.1-compatible containers like
> > Vector.  If we are now using HashMaps, though, we will have violated this
> > contract, if, in fact, such a contract exists.  Can someone clarify this
> > question?
> This is a good question.  At first I was going to say it doesn't
> impact the tests; but if your tests are dependent on a specific JDK,
> then you never run them on other JDKs.  I'm of the mind that we ought
> to agree on a plan to migrate to J2SE 1.4 features.  Still, there's the
> issue of Ant, which has a dependency on commons net.  I know they abandoned
> JDK 1.1 support in the latest release, but is their new baseline J2SE 1.2
> or 1.4?  Anyone who needs JDK 1.1 support can live with the 1.1 release and
> we can support it in a separate branch applying bug fixes if there is
> sufficient demand.  Another alternative is to start an experimental branch
> intended to become Commons Net 2.0 and continue releasing 1.x releases that
> meet Ant's compatibility requirements.  Commons Net 2.0 could be a
> fundamental redesign and reimplementation based on the new IO features
> present in J2SE 1.4.  The guts of the code would change, but not all of the
> protocol logic built around it, so it's not like it would be a complete
> rewrite.  A lot of the kluginess in Commons Net stems from the lack of
> java.nio at its genesis.  At any rate, until we hash some of this out in
> more detail, my vote is to support whatever Ant requires for compatibility.
>  If it's J2SE 1.2, then HashMaps are okay in the unit tests.
> daniel
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message