commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gary Gregory" <>
Subject RE: [VOTE] [codec] Release 1.3-RC1
Date Wed, 07 Jul 2004 23:13:48 GMT
Thank you for your comprehensive notes.

> +1.
> However:
> No Javadoc link on the left. Becoming quite common to break that out
> the Project Reports section (especially as we in no way show that
> Reports contains multiple entries).

I am trying to understand how some commons projects have an expand icon
(like BeanUtils) and some do not for things like "Project Reports". If
there is an expand icon, then you know that there is stuff in there. 

I have posted a question on commons-dev but not answers yet. I suppose
this comes from sites being generated with different versions of
commons-build. I would argue for have commons-build use the little
arrows are BeanUtils has.

The reason I have not broken out the Javadoc link is that it seems
redundant to me with the link in the report section. Since the reports
are under "Project Documentation" and Javadoc is documentation, it all
seems to fit.

> Unsure if we've standardised on the Maven Feather logo or not.

I thought I'd use the same one as the Maven site. The feathery one
doesn't look too hot to me, it also jumps out too much IMHO since it has
a white background and the bg for the area is grey.

> Changes.xml says June 2004. (obviously something you'll update, but as
> it's July I thought I'd make sure it's on your list).

Yep, will do.

> Clover report is linked in. As it's the thirty day eval, it probably
> should not be (I really need to get back to Cortex about that, have
sat on
> it for months now).

We could use Jcoverage instead or add it on top of Clover. I'll leave it
as is for now.

> A bunch of pages, such as:
> have marings. Almost definitely a Maven bug and of no huge import.

I do not see what you are referring to. In any case, there is probably
not much we can do about it (?)

> Unsure if DigestUtils() in the Javadoc wants a warning about not being
> meant for construction as with other XxxUtils.

Adding the constructor just to add the Javadoc seems over the top to me.
I understand the need for consistency so we can add it. The Javadoc will
not stop folks from using it so we could also make it deprecated but
that seems really obnoxious. ;-)

> Looking at Soundex, it's always nice for the deprecations to say when
> they'll go away (2.0?). Rarely think of it myself, but I like it when
> see people do it, makes life much easier as a user.

Seems reasonable, will do.

Thanks again,

> Just a few grumbles with a user hat on. Nothing of even major
> importance, let alone blocking.
> Hen
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > This vote is to approve the public release of commons codec 1.3-RC1.
> >
> > This will be a publicly announced RC to enable full feedback for a
> > release in about two weeks if all is well.
> >
> > Read the Release Notes:
> >
> >
> > Download the files:
> >
> >
> > Preview the site:
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Gary
> >
> > -------------
> > [ ] +1   Go ahead and release 1.3-RC1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -0
> > [ ] -1   Don't release 1.3-RC1, because...
> > -------------
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message