see intermixed
> Hum.... I'll answer the easy question first.. I think the > @author tags > should stay since it is an option. The PMC justs asks that > projects make a decision on it one way or the other. So, for > [email], I'll register myself on the "yes they should stay" side. yes ok :) no problem with it. In MyFaces, which is now in Incubator, we keep them too. But Struts for instance has removed them. > The reason is that it helps figure out who had impact on what > code, and at least for me, gives me the warm fuzzy's! It > doensn't change copyright or anything, that remains with ASF. > I belive it encourages contribution to see your name in > "lights" and I would like them to stay. yes! that's it ;-) > So, on the second side.. I guess, to what extent do we > validate email information? I agree that requiring > commons-validator seems a bit much for a small project like > [email] just to use it. On the other hand, it does wrap the > functionatliy up. > > Can you think of way to have our cake and eat it too? In > other words, what is involved in maybe adding some sort of > email validator decorate/helper class? Maybe something in a > contrib directory showing how to do it.. well helperclazzes sounds more reasonable to me, but does this blow up [email] ? > [email] should remain small, and having a dependency on > commons-validator is a lot... yes! my +1 on remoing this dependency > Eric > > PS, please tag your emails with [email], many folks filter on > that type of tag in commons! sorry just forgotten... Matthias > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matthias Wessendorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:25 AM > > To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List' > > Subject: RE: Validator inside of Email.java (RE: [email] Dumbster > > failing) > > > > > > Want to say: > > > > A object represented by a clazz (subclass) > > of Email should be a valid Email. > > > > The validation should be done *before* > > creating an object of that class. > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Matthias Wessendorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:09 AM > > > To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Validator inside of Email.java (RE: [email] Dumbster > > > failing) > > > > > > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > > > I just update my email sources. > > > and looked abit on the patches > > > you are submitting. Cool to have > > > some unittest. > > > > > > Btw. I saw that EmailValidator > > > of Commons Validator is used > > > inside of Email.java; > > > Does it realy make sence to > > > validate an e-mail inside that class? > > > > > > shouldn't this work be done outside? > > > > > > eg. enter e-mail via Struts > > > (validate it) > > > in action.clazz passing the String > > > to the class that is using [email] ? > > > > > > Just my thought. > > > > > > Btw. what should we do with the > > > @author tags? since some projects > > > of Apache/Jakarta are removing them. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Matthias > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Eric Pugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 11:35 PM > > > > Cc: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > > > Subject: RE: [email] Dumbster failing > > > > > > > > > > > > Not a problem. I appreciate your working with me on this. I am > > > > looking forward to getting [email] whipped into shape! > > > > > > > > ERi > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Corey Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 7:21 PM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Cc: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > > > > Subject: Re: [email] Dumbster failing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I have the tests all up and running with Maven. > > > > > > > > > > I have also made some minor mods, based on the tests or > > > > improving the > > > > > input checking (this is why some of the tests are failing, > > > > there where > > > > > against my changes not the HEAD version.... sorry) > > > > > > > > > > So once we get this formatting issue sorted, I will submit > > > > to you the > > > > > new patch. This should raise the test coverage to > 90+% for all > > > > > (non-deprecated) classes. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Corey > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - > > > > 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] > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
