commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [collections] Cleanup of trunk
Date Tue, 03 Jul 2012 21:57:32 GMT
On 3 July 2012 22:43, Thomas Neidhart <> wrote:
> On 07/03/2012 11:04 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>> Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I recently started to work more on collections and cleaning up the trunk
>>> to make it a candidate for a release and would like to ask a few
>>> questions:
>>>  - there is still lots of javadoc missing, moving the source code level
>>>    to Java 1.6 would allow the use of @Override in more places (instead
>>>    of putting a /** {inheritDoc} */ everywhere)
>>>    this has been discussed for vfs a few weeks ago, and my
>>>    understanding was that this proposal was well received, so what do
>>>    you think about doing the same for collections?
>>>  - unit tests: there are currently two unit tests for certain classes
>>>    that are almost similar, e.g. TestListOrderedMap and
>>>    TestListOrderedMap2. Does anybody know why this exists?
>>>    also I would like to go to annotation based unit tests like in the
>>>    other components and rename the tests to the common style:
>>>    ClassNameTest.
>>>  - consistency with commons rules. There are several things that are
>>>    different to other components atm:
>>>    o authors contained in source files
>>>    o no changes.xml to track changes
>>>    o since and version tags are a bit different
>>>    o package.html should be
>>>    and I guess other things too that I have not spotted yet.
>>> Are there any objections / suggestions to continue with the cleanup?
>> A short overview clearly indicates that cc4 won't be a drop-in replacement
>> for cc3. Therefore we have to change the groupId/artifactId now to
>> org.apache.commons:commons-collections4 and the package should be renamed to
>> org.apache.commons.collections4 (according the rules we used for lang3).
> Yes, there is already an issue for this: COLLECTIONS-382. The question
> is do we change asap or shortly before a release (the way it was done
> for commons-math afaik)?

Doing the package rename just before release makes it possible to
easily run Clirr.
This can be used to help in creating the release notes - we'll need to
document how to upgrade.

AFAIK there's no benefit in changing the package rename earlier.

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

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

View raw message