On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:23:26 +0100, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Gilles,
Gilles wrote:
Hi.
How about renaming the component to "Commons Numbers" (or another
name
if preferred) that would contain the following modules:
* commons-numbers-core (with classes such as "Precision").
* commons-numbers-complex
* commons-numbers-quaternion
* commons-numbers-fraction
* commons-numbers-continued-fraction
* commons-numbers-fft (Fast Fourier Transform)
* commons-numbers-fct (Fast Cosine Transform)
* ...
?
Gilles
As long as it does not mean, we have individual release cycles for
these
modules...
Got it... last time, already. ;-)
Seriously, that limitation alone should favour the "one concept, one
component" solution. No? Oh I already said that too, I think...
I really don't grok why a sub-par (by much) solution is preferred
just because of the assumption that there will be more review work.
That won't be so, if review is performed on a regular basis and work
is distributed among all developers (active and passive). The smaller
the codebase, the easier it is to spot something "strange".
Big components are intimidating and I won't be surprised that people
tend to skip them entirely, or stay focused on selected parts, without
considering the bigger picture).
Gilles
Cheers,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
