>The PathBuilder is aimed to be more lightweight than a Path when just >need to craft a String path to pass to the ResourceResolver or a >similar API. > >It's outside the api.resource.util package since it's a standalone >utility that might move outside the API bundle in the future, if we get >more path-related utilities in. > >That being said, I see three options: > >1. Go ahead with the release, given the above arguments >2. Move Path and PathSet to the resource.path package, for consistency >3. Move pack PathBuilder to the resourceresolver package as an internal >class
thanks for the explanation - so this was by intention. i withdraw my -1 vote on this vote. i personally would like 2., but with "api" in the package name. we already have some utility classes in the API, why not some more handling paths. esp. i would like to put all path-related classes in the same package to make it easier to find them. but if no one else has a problem with the current package layout i'm fine with it as well stefan
