Re: Moved RSU to Text [was] [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Amey Jadiye]

I'm fine with that, how about other people think about the change ? and one
open question related to this in other mail thread.
http://markmail.org/message/2o3v7qka742kc2rv

Regards,
Amey

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Rob Tompkins  wrote:

>
>
> > On Sep 12, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> >
> > Hello Rob,
>
> I'm going to be away from my computer until Friday. I'll give it a look
> then if that's alright with you.
>
> Cheers,
> -Rob
> >
> > I have submitted pull req. let me know if below action plan looks good.
> >
> > * RandomStringGenerator in commons-text
> > * new RandomStringUtils in commons-text with different package using
> > RandomStringGenerator
> > * Mark RandomStringUtils in commons-lang as deprecated
> > * release commons-text 1.2
> > * release commons-lang 3.7 (doesn't matter ATM)
> > * later remove RSU from commons-lang from Commons lang 4.0
> >
> > Regards,
> > Amey
> >
> >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 4:43 PM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:05 AM, Gilles 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 06:55:49 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> > On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
> > for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
> >
> > RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it
> >> quickly.
> > Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm
> not
> > only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic
> with
> > using
> > RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should
> >> release
> > text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,
> >> WDYT
> > ?
> >
> 
>  I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew
>  “line between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality
>  should go in [lang] if the arbitrary java developer would probably
>  want it, whereas text is geared towards folks actually doing text
>  manipulation [1].
> 
>  Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other
>  folks’ thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here.
>  That said, I’m perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.
> >>>
> >>> "Grey area" should favour small components.
> >>
> >> Fair point. I take that to mean that you think that it should either go
> >> into text to make lang smaller or its own component.
> >>
> >> I suppose because the generator lives in [text] that makes a good
> argument
> >> for [text].
> >>
> >> More thoughts out there?
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Gilles
> >>>
> 
>  Cheers,
>  -Rob
> 
>  [1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto
> 
> > Regards,
> > Amey
> >
> >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello Benedikt,
> >>>
> >>> How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original
> >> intent
> >> was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed
> to
> >> backwards?
> >>
> >> But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that
> most
> >> folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think
> that
> >> question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction
> seems
> >> reasonable to me.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> 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
>
>


-- 

-

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Moved RSU to Text [was] [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Rob Tompkins]

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> 
> Hello Rob,

I'm going to be away from my computer until Friday. I'll give it a look then if 
that's alright with you. 

Cheers,
-Rob
> 
> I have submitted pull req. let me know if below action plan looks good.
> 
> * RandomStringGenerator in commons-text
> * new RandomStringUtils in commons-text with different package using
> RandomStringGenerator
> * Mark RandomStringUtils in commons-lang as deprecated
> * release commons-text 1.2
> * release commons-lang 3.7 (doesn't matter ATM)
> * later remove RSU from commons-lang from Commons lang 4.0
> 
> Regards,
> Amey
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 4:43 PM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:05 AM, Gilles  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 06:55:49 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> 
> Hi Rob,
> 
> Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
> for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
> 
> RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it
>> quickly.
> Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
> only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
> using
> RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should
>> release
> text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,
>> WDYT
> ?
> 
 
 I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew
 “line between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality
 should go in [lang] if the arbitrary java developer would probably
 want it, whereas text is geared towards folks actually doing text
 manipulation [1].
 
 Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other
 folks’ thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here.
 That said, I’m perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.
>>> 
>>> "Grey area" should favour small components.
>> 
>> Fair point. I take that to mean that you think that it should either go
>> into text to make lang smaller or its own component.
>> 
>> I suppose because the generator lives in [text] that makes a good argument
>> for [text].
>> 
>> More thoughts out there?
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> 
>>> Gilles
>>> 
 
 Cheers,
 -Rob
 
 [1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto
 
> Regards,
> Amey
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Benedikt,
>>> 
>>> How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
>> [snip]
>> 
>> I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original
>> intent
>> was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
>> backwards?
>> 
>> But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
>> folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
>> question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
>> reasonable to me.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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

Re: Moved RSU to Text [was] [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Amey Jadiye]

Hello Rob,

I have submitted pull req. let me know if below action plan looks good.

* RandomStringGenerator in commons-text
* new RandomStringUtils in commons-text with different package using
RandomStringGenerator
* Mark RandomStringUtils in commons-lang as deprecated
* release commons-text 1.2
* release commons-lang 3.7 (doesn't matter ATM)
* later remove RSU from commons-lang from Commons lang 4.0

Regards,
Amey

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 4:43 PM Rob Tompkins  wrote:

>
> > On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:05 AM, Gilles  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 06:55:49 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> >>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Rob,
> >>>
> >>> Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
> >>> for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
> >>>
> >>> RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it
> quickly.
> >>> Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
> >>> only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
> >>> using
> >>> RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should
> release
> >>> text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,
> WDYT
> >>> ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew
> >> “line between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality
> >> should go in [lang] if the arbitrary java developer would probably
> >> want it, whereas text is geared towards folks actually doing text
> >> manipulation [1].
> >>
> >> Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other
> >> folks’ thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here.
> >> That said, I’m perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.
> >
> > "Grey area" should favour small components.
>
> Fair point. I take that to mean that you think that it should either go
> into text to make lang smaller or its own component.
>
> I suppose because the generator lives in [text] that makes a good argument
> for [text].
>
> More thoughts out there?
>
> -Rob
>
> >
> > Gilles
> >
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto
> >>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Amey
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
> >>>
> 
> > On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Benedikt,
> >
> > How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
>  [snip]
> 
>  I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original
> intent
>  was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
>  backwards?
> 
>  But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
>  folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
>  question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
>  reasonable to me.
> 
>  Thoughts?
> 
>  -Rob
> 
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>