On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, matthew.hawthorne wrote:
> Gary Gregory wrote: > > Sorry for the flame but this is a 'shake-my-head-in-disbelief' moment > > that I find discouraging. > > I pretty much agree, but from my POV [lang] stopped moving forward a > while ago anyway. Most new requests I believe this is actually a good thing for a Commons project. A release should be followed by a period of development inactivity in which user questions are answered and bugs accumulate. Pressure increases until the project then becomes actively developed again. The bad side to this is a failure on our part on release-early/often. Part of this is an Apache general problem: quality is a higher focus and a release is more involved, and part is the usual time excuse :) I blame Bugzilla a bit too. Going near it depresses me when I could be using JIRA, but that might just be a personal thing. > As another example, I've never even liked the public constructor in > *Utils classes, even though I understand why it's > done. Community means ..erm, that word that means accepting things we don't like. Compromise! The Velocity/Constructor issue was such a thing and though it causes the occasional complaint, I doubt if anyone has been hurt availability of the constructor. > I think that developers should have the freedom to make classes and > methods final where appropriate, I'm happy for this one to be opened up again. Can't recall why we don't make the Util's final. Am sure someone will remind us. > and make other design decisions that may limit the possible uses of the > library. In losing that ability, I believe that > the quality of the code suffers. And for someone like me, it makes me > less motivated to become involved or share ideas. > > I may be dead wrong, these are just some feelings that I have. Pretty understandable. It can be a jading process sometimes. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
