On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Damjan, > > Le 26/11/2013 06:31, Damjan Jovanovic a écrit : > > > Firstly, we discussed several options before for the 1.0 release, and > > agreed that the contents of trunk would be quickly pushed out as 1.0 > > with minimal changes (many/most users are using 1.0-SNAPSHOT), and > > then the big API redesign would be 2.0. I've also been thinking of > > doing a complete rewrite for 2.0 and only pulling in some of the good > > bits we have now. So it's extremely discouraging to be pushed for more > > and more changes, many of which will have no post-1.x value, and don't > > even fit in with what was originally agreed on. > > Sorry for the late review. I'm not opposed to the release and I won't > mind if you prefer to ignore my feedback :) > > > > It looks like CachingInputStream is used by IccProfileParser, and > > appears to be used to store data that has been read from the > > underlying stream so it can be re-read later. You can copy it to > > commons-io, but I'd prefer not having a runtime dependency on it. And > > it's ByteSourceInputStream you really want in commons-io and/or > > commons-compress, a gem that allows seeking over an InputStream. > > I would be possible to avoid a runtime dependency by shading the classes. > That's not necessary, the POM shows this is a test-only dependency. Gary > > > > Enum vs public static final, hmm. > > I don't think that makes any difference performance wise, in both cases > it leads to a comparison of references. > > > > Thank you, but that probably broke compatibility for 1.0-SNAPSHOT > > users, so now we have to release RC7 as 1.0 :-). > > ;) > > > > Hidden Javadocs don't hide packages from IDE code completion. There is > > only 2 choices w.r.t. packages: keeping everything in one package to > > hide internal classes by giving them package private access, and > > keeping classes in different packages to better structure code but > > then having to make them public as a result (and choice 3, a pipe > > dream, use OSGi and don't export the packages with internal classes). > > Maybe a public factory method in a public base class returning > > package-private subclasses would work? > > I know hiding the javadoc doesn't solve the issue, but that makes the > documentation cleaner and less intimidating. > > > Emmanuel Bourg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
