On Jan 26, 2012, at 10:47, Adrian Crum <adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> wrote:
> On 1/26/2012 6:59 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Christian Grobmeier >> <grobme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Benedikt Ritter >>> <b...@systemoutprintln.de> wrote: >>>>> But i found only discussions about duration& joda-time dated 2004. >>>>> >>>>> (http://markmail.org/thread/733yqv5zwzsngj3j) >>>>> Now i really need in Duration functionality (especially such as >>>>> Duration.parse(String)). >>>>> >>>> I heard about joda-time a while ago. My impression is, that the joda >>>> project >>>> is not that active anymore (please correct me, if I'm wrong). So I would >>>> vouch for additions to lang regarding durations. What I'm also really >>>> missing in lang.time is conversation of durations. For example: >>>> DurationUtils.convertToMinutes(long seconds). >>> Joda Time is imho a great lib. Before a few weeks I replaced all the >>> JDK stuff with Joda and it really saved my life. There was a release >>> in July 2011 or so and my impression is more this lib is stable and >>> does not need many releases. Actually I can't imagine a feature I miss >>> in Joda at the moment. >>> >>>>> I don't understand the Commons point on this issue. >>>>> >>>>> - Commons Lang doesn't need in own implementation of this >>>>> functionality and you suggest use joda-time? >>>>> - Commons Lang needs in simple& lightweight implementation of Duration? >>>>> >>>>> Also i cannot find correspond issue in jira (but Eric Crampton in 2004 >>>>> wrote about >>>>> "Commons Lang task list that there is a need for DateRange/Duration >>>>> classes"). >>>> As you said, it is a while ago, since this was discussed. So let's review >>>> this topic again. >>>> >>>> What are your thoughts? >>> Hen (who is mainly behind lang) and Gary already mentioned, they don't >>> want to replicate Joda code into [lang]. I don't see any reasons why >>> we should do that now. Instead I would prefer to mark the time package >>> as deprecated and point users to joda. time does rely on jdk classes >>> and as I have found out by own experience, it is dangerous to work >>> with them. >> Long-term vision wise; my expectation is to drop our time package like >> a lead balloon as soon as Joda enters the JDK :) > > Just to clarify: Joda is not entering the JDK. JSR-310 has been proposed and > might make it into the JDK, but JSR-310 is not Joda. > > http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=310 Is this jsr dead? What's the next step? Gary > > -Adrian > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
