On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 7:30 AM Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 10:03 Vladimir Sitnikov <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > >it could be done as a fork > > > > That is fair. Everything could be done as a fork. > > > > On the other hand, since this proposal requires changes to both Maven > > coordinates and Java package, the change could be implemented > > right within the current commons-lang3 with full backward compatibility. > > > > For instance, the current commons-lang3 is 3.19.0, so > commons-stringutils3 > > could be > > published as 3.20.0 along with all the other lang3 artifacts. > > > > Do you have strong objections to doing the proposal in commons-lang3? > > > > As I stated earlier, I am -1 to making this mess. > I agree with Gary on this. I have one comment. We have often referred to components like [lang]. [collections], [io], [pool] as "base" components. We know these things often nest deeply in the dependency hierarchy of user applications. That is why we have traditionally been conservative about 0) adding dependencies to them 1) bloating their scope. Instead of chopping them up into little pieces, IMO we are better off relentlessly pruning / preventing bloat in the base components. Phil > > Gary > > > > > Vladimir > > >
