Stefan Seifert wrote > >> 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
TBH I didn't catch that one :(, I would prefer #2 as well I guess the best would be to redo the release and fix the api package. Once we have it out, we have to support it "forever" WDYT? Regards Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland cziege...@apache.org
