Sorry about having taken several days to respond
here... I was unaware of the release status of the
code in question and my response was mainly reflex. I
agree that making a public API as generic as possible
before an official release is the right thing to do.
Jakarta commons is, of course, made
I agree with you that breaking existing API's is a bad thing. However,
the project is currently at 1.0-dev and the main page itself states:
* The code is unreleased
* Methods and classes can and will appear and disappear without warning
While changing the API at this point is less than idea
Ok, it sounds like we need to get another patch, or manually separate
out the checkstyle from the changes.
Eric, would you mind creating another two patches and attaching them
in a post to the list??
Thanks,
On 5/11/05, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just joined the list myself... (f
I just joined the list myself... (for sandbox
commons-pgp) but I noticed that in the non-checkstyle
changes from this patch, the signature of a public
method is modified in at least one place. This will
break already-compiled code running against the
library. Over in Ant-land we consider that bad;
Eric,
Firstly, welcome... Secondly... thanks.
There are two things that would like to suggest with your patch.
First:
Please try to break this patch down into discrete sections. i.e. one
patch for formatting and one for each of the other changes.
Second:
Please submit your patch(es) to the bug
I read on the user list that Commons Email is approaching a v1.0 release
and decided to take a look at the Maven reports to see how close it was
and what needed to be done. I'm always somewhat disappointed when the
reports reflect that things aren't as tight as I've come to expect from
Jakarta
