Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of flamefew@gmail.com designates
 209.85.146.176 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=IjQCnu0whSpOZab8M3fQ7aPP7D2+9o8ASY2cEYDX4MMPbYeawNrdrSx9vPjS+Ni9bMGy8mvZ8N7jXJnWzzrh60ohXx6ZH3Y6dCwtPJfZQXfjCbRcm4XqN/CNnR4J2SlrqTLej5SsdCNV1xcuMw1FqviXuAjr/6uHGAiAKp8MwrQ=
Message-ID: <31cc37360802042144t2d0a79cana829f0a3088fe477@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:44:22 -0800
From: "Henri Yandell" <flamefew@gmail.com>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [io] 2.0 Moving to minimum of JDK 1.5
In-Reply-To: <55afdc850802042047u29b4507fg2f26e3f355c2205e@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <55afdc850802042047u29b4507fg2f26e3f355c2205e@mail.gmail.com>

On Feb 4, 2008 8:47 PM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> We've discussed moving to a minimum of JDK 1.5 for IO 2.0 previously -
> theres also an JIRA report here:
>    http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-140
>
> From memory the preference was to move to a new package name  - how
> about "org.apache.commons.io2"?

For Collections it makes sense as there's a big API change planned.

For the others, I think they should charge in and see what kind of API
changes are required. If we're talking small ones, then I'd prefer not
to. I continue to not think that the next major version of a jar has
to kill itself over backwards compatibility (ie: what's the point of a
major version).

> Are there any objections to me creating an IO 1.4 branch from the
> current trunk and then starting work on IO 2.0 in the trunk.

Any need to make the branch?

ie) Wait until you need it; as long as you have a tag of the latest
release you can always branch from that.

> Initial plans would be:
>
>  - rename to the new package
>  - remove deprecated items
>  - Making appropriate JDK 1.5 changes (generics, using StringBuilder
> and new Appendable for Writers etc).

I'd move the new package one to 3rd rather than 1st.

Hen

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