Not in the builds it isn't. We hadn't decided on whether it will be id, identifiers, uid, etc, so I just moved the ones we wanted into the main package and left util as is. It is not tagged as LANG_2_0.
Hen On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Gary Gregory wrote: > The util package is still in there, it should not (4 +1's on not including > it). > > Gary > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 05:15 > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > Subject: Re: [lang] Lang 2.0 release? > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Phil Steitz wrote: > > > > > >>How does that look? Should we call a vote? > > > > > > I would fix Stephen's 1) and possibly 2), rebuild including Gary's > > > recent commit addressing 3) and then call for a vote (before someone > > > finds something else ;). The javadoc on the maven site now looks fine. > > > Must have been a JDK bug. > > > > 1) .zip binary should now be binary, I'd screwed up the ant script. > > 2) The source packages now have a jar file in the top directory. > > 3) I missed one commit of Gary's, fixing his name in various places. > > > > So, I'll rebuild again to get Gary's changes, but without the checkstyle > > fixes, then call a vote. > > > > > Should I wait until you cut the release to commit my maven build > > > changes? I notice that project.xml, maven.xml etc are included in the > > > source disto. > > > > I'll just ignore them :) The current maven stuff builds the jar, which is > > the important part for that at the moment. > > > > In a couple of hours [gotta get to work]. > > > > Hen > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
