Wrapping would still hold code on our side. We have to get rid of code… If we want to start removing CloudStack’s StringUtils in favor of StringUtils from Apache, we could start creating PRs by components (java project in Eclipse). That is manageable to do and to review. There are about 119 classes that use CloudStack’s StringUtils.
We will not be able to remove CloudStack's StringUtils though. There are very specific things there such as "applyPagination" that should not even be there... I guess the programmer was running out of places to write code On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > All, I am having second thoughts. I think we should maintain a wrapper for > string utils and pass through as much as possible to commons string utils. > A similar thing is applicable to logging. It was started at one time and a > second attempt was started to use slf4j. > I think we should encapsulate these kind of utilities to facilitate > migration. > There is also json and xml formatting and maybe handling sockets and (big > one) data access objects :/ > > @Ron, all string utils are static methods. > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:11 AM, Ron Wheeler <rwheeler@artifact-software. > com> wrote: > > > Certainly better to find the references and remove them if you can get > > that done in a single effort. > > > > Just a technical question: Could one not just add the Warning to the > > constructor? > > Might have to create a null (log warning only) constructor. > > > > Ron > > > > > > On 10/01/2018 3:58 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > > >> We can add log messages to each of the methods in StringUtils but I do > not > >> think that is a good way to go. Any method you touch you can reform or > >> remove anyhow. > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Ron Wheeler < > >> rwhee...@artifact-software.com > >> > >>> wrote: > >>> Agreed about deprecation. > >>> A logged WARNing would be detected during testing as well as at > run-time. > >>> > >>> Ron > >>> > >>> On 10/01/2018 3:34 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > >>> > >>> Ron, we could but that would only log during compile-time, not on > >>> runtime. > >>> I am doing some analysis and commenting in Wido's ticket. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:23 PM, Ron Wheeler > <rwheeler@artifact-software. > >>> com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Is it possible to mark it as deprecated and have it log a warning when > >>>> used? > >>>> > >>>> Ron > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 10/01/2018 2:26 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I think we could start with giving it an explicit non standard name > like > >>>>> CloudStackLocalStringUtils or something a little shorter. Making sure > >>>>> that > >>>>> we prefer for these types of utils to be imported from other > projects. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 01/10/2018 01:09 PM, Rafael Weingärtner wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Instead of creating a PR for that, we could do the bit by bit job > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> (hopefully one day we finish the job). > >>>>>>> Every time we see a code using ACS's StringUtils, we check if it > can > >>>>>>> be > >>>>>>> replaced by Apache's one. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Yes, but that will slip from peoples attention and we will probably > >>>>>>> see > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> cases where people still use the old one by accident. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I've created a issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira > >>>>>> /browse/CLOUDSTACK-10225 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I also started on some low hanging fruit as some methods in > >>>>>> StringUtils > >>>>>> are not used or are very easy to replace. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Wido > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Wido den Hollander < > w...@widodh.nl> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 01/10/2018 12:01 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'd say remove as much functionality as we can from 'our' > >>>>>>>> StringUtils > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> phase them out asap. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Yes, but such a PR would be invasive and would be difficult to > >>>>>>>>> merge > >>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> also break a lot of other code. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It's not easy since it will touch a lot, but I mean, a lot of > files. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Our StringUtils was a very good solution, but the Apache one is > >>>>>>>> better I > >>>>>>>> think. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Wido > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Wido den Hollander < > >>>>>>>> w...@widodh.nl> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We have com.cloud.utils.StringUtils which has a few nice > functions, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>> throughout the code I also see org.apache.commons.lang.String > >>>>>>>>>> Utils > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> They both provide about the same functionality, but which one do > >>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>> prefer? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I'd say org.apache.commons.lang.StringUtils as that allows us > to > >>>>>>>>>> remove > >>>>>>>>>> our own StringUtils, but we could also have 'our' StringUtils > >>>>>>>>>> simply > >>>>>>>>>> be a > >>>>>>>>>> wrapper around org.apache.commons.lang.StringUtils > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Opinions? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Wido > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>> Ron Wheeler > >>>> President > >>>> Artifact Software Inc > >>>> email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > >>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler > >>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> -- > >>> Daan > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Ron Wheeler > >>> President > >>> Artifact Software Inc > >>> email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > >>> skype: ronaldmwheeler > >>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > -- > > Ron Wheeler > > President > > Artifact Software Inc > > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > > skype: ronaldmwheeler > > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > > > > > > > -- > Daan > -- Rafael Weingärtner
