Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.209 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=M2OyvD5a6tYjPazpgm7pLoqYm0FlG/JbLH2tDQKVNGz6FGBv56MyfE0yy/TtDj5l7u
         nwENtX7v8qxNVIrk5Qhhh28Wr1t2Jg4y6CtyWh1Nby5Ha1V/EXm3elzNDL5dvR0Oss+d
         Ic6ZzHpp7paOCLxjpHTAaOnDVmAHC+1pRK7b4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1259054219490-786635.post@n4.nabble.com>
References: <1259054219490-786635.post@n4.nabble.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:58:20 +0000
Message-ID: <25aac9fc0911240158v18760f30rce5b555ff1c2f958@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [JEXL 2.0] o.a.c.jexl or o.a.c.jexl2 ?
From: sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 24/11/2009, henrib <henrib@apache.org> wrote:
>
>  Thanks to all for your valuable feedback.
>
>  The general consensus is that although it may be possible to keep oac.jexl,
>  it is safer to use
>  oac.jexl2 as the package name for JEXL2.
>  I'll refresh the code line accordingly soon.
>
>  I might take the opportunity to move some (deep API) classes around to for
>  the sake of clarity/extensibility (introspection / util) if no-one raises
>  strong concerns against it.

Perhaps you could let us know exactly what you are planning to do first?

Also, please do the jexl => jexl2 changes separately from any other changes.

>  Cheers
>
> Henrib
>
>
>  Henrib-2 wrote:
>  >
>  > One (non Maven related) question for the JEXL community:
>  >
>  > The (soon-to-be published) JEXL-2.0 RCx version comes with a lot of
>  > changes. The upper level API deprecates ExpressionFactory & ScriptFactory
>  > - replaced by JexlEngine -, Expression methods that used to throw
>  > exceptions (ParseException, Exception) throw unchecked exceptions and the
>  > inner level classes (o.a.c.{util,introspection,etc}) have to many changes
>  > to be listed.
>  >
>  > Upper level API code compatibility has been checked through Jelly and more
>  > recently through Commons Configuration; 1.1 behavior seems preserved
>  > enough for the switch to JEXL-2.0 to be one compilation away.
>  > However, with so many changes and not so many checks, it may be preferable
>  > to be on the safe side and put the whole JEXL-2.0 into
>  > org.apache.commons.jexl2; this would allow 1.1 dependant code to continue
>  > living its merry way (OSGi non withstanding) and let switchers decide when
>  > to actually perform the switch.
>  >
>  > We need your opinions and options; let us know.
>  > Cheers
>  > Henrib
>  >
>  >
>
>  --
>
> View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/JEXL-2-0-o-a-c-jexl-or-o-a-c-jexl2-tp727081p786635.html
>
> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  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