1. The primary unit of reuse and release is the package. 2. The package library is not a framework but a collection of components designed to be used independently. 3. Each package must have a clearly defined purpose, scope, and API -- Do one thing well, and keep your contracts. 4. ...
HttpClient is generally concerned with URLs but URIs are useful beyond HttpClient. URIs are well documented with relevent RFCs. I think that a seperate RFC conforming URI package would be an excellent addition to Jakarta.
A project of this nature should copy the current code from httpclient and start a sandbox project. Development should continue there untill development has been proven and a formal commons project proposal can be made.
Likely the developers would want to seek HttpClient as a key user of the new package, but this does not mandate that HttpClient will use the new package. Nor does it require that a jar dependancy be added (re-use can be achieved in multiple ways) but the new codebase could be re-used in other ways if that was deemed preferable.
I would support having a seperate URI package. From my perspective the possible benefits are clear and the possible drawbacks are avoidable.
Jandalf.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]