commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell" <flame...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [IO] Planning IO 1.4 release
Date Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:24:00 GMT
Happy to move IO-137 over to post-1.4.

Hen

On Jan 9, 2008 1:04 AM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK looks like were nearly ready for IO 1.4 release - theres a minor
> issue to resolve on IO-77[1] so that just leaves IO-137[2] to decide
> whether we're going to do anything about for 1.4 or move it to
> post-1.4 - Henri and Jukka expressed interest on IO-137 - do you guys
> want to / have time to look at this?
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-77
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-137
>
> Niall
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2008 7:05 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > +1 to Commons IO 1.4!
> >
> > On Jan 6, 2008 4:58 AM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 6, 2008 2:23 AM, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think we should deal with IO-137 as it's a minor enhancement and
> > > > comes with tests. I'll volunteer to look at that.
> > >
> > > I looked at this a while back and using the baos buffers directly in
> > > an InputStream raises a safety issue (if the baos is modified while
> > > the InputStream is being read) - do we care about that?
> >
> > I kind of agree. I was thinking about proposing a "copy on write" flag
> > to reset() that would start with a new set of buffers when there are
> > InputStreams reading from the same buffers, but that seems too complex
> > to me.
> >
> > Apart from that, I like the general idea in IO-137 (it's similar to my
> > readFrom() proposal) so I'd like to see it in 1.4 if there's a
> > consensus on what form the feature should take. I'm willing to invest
> > some time to work out the details.
> >
> > > > IO-51 has tests, so worth a look at if that can be done before the
> > > > others are resolved. ie) punt to post-1.4 iff it's the last one left.
> > >
> > > I had a brief look and my initial thought was the Limiter should just
> > > be doing the throttling and the reading/writing should be in the
> > > input/output implementations - but I haven't looked in detail.
> >
> > I looked at IO-51 a few months ago, and came to the same conclusion.
> > The implementation isn't too modular and probably too complex (i.e.
> > could be done with less code). Of course I didn't have time to come up
> > with an alternative implementation.
> >
> > I like the feature though, and I have some use cases where it would
> > come in handy, but I think it's better to improve the Limiter API
> > before the feature gets released.
> >
> > > IO-148 is done from my PoV - I left it open in case anyone wanted to
> > > object to me renaming it today. If Gary and Jukka are happy then we
> > > can mark it as fixed.
> >
> > I'm happy.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Jukka Zitting
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

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


Mime
View raw message