commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Thomas <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1632171 [1/20] - in /commons/proper/beanutils/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/ main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/converters/ main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/expression/ main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/l...
Date Fri, 24 Oct 2014 20:47:21 GMT
On 24/10/2014 21:17, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Am 24.10.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Gary Gregory:
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Oliver Heger <>
>> wrote:
>>> Am 23.10.2014 um 22:58 schrieb Gary Gregory:
>>>> Patches go stale no matter what...
>>> Right, this can happen during normal development, but not necessarily
>>> because of a big bang change for which there is no technical reason, but
>>> which is just a matter of personal taste.
>> I call it a technical reason, you call it personal taste, we are not going
>> to agree.
> Obviously not. So how do we proceed?

You work it out until a consensus is reached and then that consensus is
implemented. The more entrenched folks are in their positions, the
longer consensus is going to take. (And no, a VOTE is not the right way
to resolve this.)

My own view is that the addition of the final keywords does have
technical merit. Not enough to make me want to spend the time to fix the
projects I work on, but I wouldn't complain if someone else wanted to
make all the necessary changes. Similarly while I think it would be a
shame to throw away all this good work, I could live with that option if
that was the consensus opinion.

The issue of out-dated patches is a red herring. That is a separate
problem. The community needs to apply / review patches faster.


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

View raw message