With all the changes you've made a release of VFS is warranted. I'm not sure why a renae would be required instead of just calling it VFS3. To be honest, I've never much liked the VFS API, expecially the ConfigurationBuilder stuff. Losing the API in favor of the Java API seems like a good way to correct that. Since Java 7 calls the new API FileSystem, FileSystems, etc., I would think VFS would be the appropriate name. FWIW, I would imagine that other than converting to whatever Java 7 requires all the providers would be left largely intact.
Ralph On Dec 5, 2011, at 12:49 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All: > > I've made several improvements to VFS over the last couple of months which > feels ready for a release soon. > > One important internal change is that the builds runs almost all unit tests > :) I've not found an easy way to embed a WebDAV server in the tests like > JackRabbit, which would be nice to do. > > I know Ralph just mentioned thoughts of a VFS3 on top of Java 7, which is > great news indeed. This feels like it needs a new name instead of a version > change though because the change is so radical (and nice.) > > Thoughts? > > -- > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
