commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [BeanUtils] Plans for BeanUtils and BeanUtils2
Date Thu, 21 Feb 2013 19:14:05 GMT
Hi,


2013/2/20 Oliver Heger <oliver.heger@oliver-heger.de>

> Am 20.02.2013 16:25, schrieb Benedikt Ritter:
>
>  Hi Jörg
>>
>>
>> 2013/2/20 Jörg Schaible <Joerg.Schaible@scalaris.com>
>>
>>  Hi Benedikt,
>>>
>>> Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to discuss how the development of [BeanUtils] and [BeanUtils2]
>>>> can be continued.
>>>>
>>>> The last release of BeanUtils (1.8.3) is now nearly 3 years ago and
>>>> there
>>>> are 92 open issues in JIRA.
>>>> OTOH we've put quiet some effort into [BeanUtils2]. There are some
>>>> issues
>>>> that have to be addressed* but the API is in a good shape.
>>>> But [BeanUtils2] is also a complete redesign of the API that is binary
>>>> incompatible with [BeanUtils].
>>>>
>>>> Keeping this in mind I propose the following:
>>>> - promote [BeanUtils2] to proper; move it to a 2.0 branch in the
>>>>
>>> beanutils
>>>
>>>> svn subtree.**
>>>> - fix all issues that can be fixed without breaking BC in [BeanUtils] to
>>>> push out a last bug fix release for users that don't want to swtich to a
>>>> new API.
>>>> - Make clear that BeanUtils 1.8.4 will be the last release of  the 1.x
>>>> line.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds perfectly reasonable. If you have only maintenance stuff 1.8.4 is
>>> fine. If you intent to add new features for the 1.x line, you might
>>> better
>>> call it 1.9.0 after all this years.
>>>
>>>
>> Okay, I'll try to review the open issues this weekend.
>>
>>
> I am also interested in a new BeanUtils release and would like to
> contribute some new features. Unfortunately, I am not sure when I get the
> cycles to work on this.


Nice to hear this. I'm starting tonight by sorting the open issues into can
"be fixed in 1.8.4" and "has to be fixed later".
IIRC you need new features for [configuration], right? Can you create
issues for this, if you don't already have?

TIA!
Benedikt


>
>
> Oliver
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>> Benedikt
>>>>
>>>> * Some JavaDoc is still missing and we have to take a look at the
>>>>
>>> caching.
>>>
>>>> AFAIK WeakHashMap is not the best choice for an in-memory-cache. We'll
>>>> discuss this in a separate thread.
>>>> ** I don't know the exact formal process for this. What has to be done
>>>> to
>>>> promote a component to proper? Does there have to be a formal vote by
>>>> the
>>>> PMC?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure for this special case either. Actually you're not promoting a
>>> new
>>> component. However, you may look into the archives, IIRC Simo had the
>>> same
>>> case for the last major release of digester.
>>>
>>>
>> I'll ask Simo what he has done for digister.
>>
>> Thanks a lot!
>> Benedikt
>>
>>
>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jörg
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>> ---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message