All -

Would it be ok if I merged MimeUtils into MimeTypes?  IMO it would simplify
the code.

- Keith



Keith R. Bennett wrote:
> 
> All -
> 
> I've created a JIRA issue (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-81)
> to create a default constructor for MimeUtils.  The patch attached to that
> issue adds the constructor, which gets its MimeTypes object from the
> default TikaConfig.  This is not very efficient, but is effective as a
> temporary solution.
> 
> This is pretty urgent for me -- I have a software deadline tonight and I'd
> like to use a version of Tika that is checked into subversion.  If it's ok
> with you I'd like to commit the TIKA-81 patch this afternoon, and we can
> devise a longer term solution later.
> 
> As a longer term solution, I'd like to suggest refactoring the MIME type
> classes.  I share Jukka's confusion with these classes, and there's a lot
> of great functionality in there that could be easier to use.  Here are a
> couple of possible changes:
> 
> * Combine MimeTypes and MimeUtils (as I believe Jukka implied).  MimeUtils
> is not so large, so merging it with MimeTypes would IMO be reasonable.
> 
> * Provide a default constructor that uses a default configuration.  As
> with TikaConfig itself, this would allow users to more easily use the
> functionality in the great majority of cases where the default
> configuration would be acceptable.
> 
> If the two classes would be merged, then I'd suggest the name
> MimeTypeUtils.
> 
> - Keith
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/MimeTypes-MimeUtils-Refactoring-tf4649072.html#a13344892
Sent from the Apache Tika - Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to