[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation
From: |
Nic Ferrier |
Subject: |
Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation |
Date: |
Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:02:20 +0000 |
>if it is deemed righteous we could put the stream classes into some
>javax.mail.io package. i didn't think we were allowed to add or subtract
>from the api though - if we were it would have been more sensible to
>create shared mime implementation support classes that could be used
>both by http and mail agents.
Where there is a clear separation it's sensible to create a separate
class in the gnu namespace. For example at some point I'd like to
merge our Base64 stuff with other GNU implementations of base 64
streams (Paperclips has one for HTTP stuff).
This will be possible once the various GNU java projects have matured,
indeed I expect it to just happen, without much argument. But first
we'll have had to grow the tree of utility classes and find efficient
ways to share them between projects (one doesn't want to make a
gnu.jar a dependancy for every single project).
Of course, where Sun improve the API to allow something to be
implemented directly we'll do that.
But we shouldn't unanimously alter the API.
Nic
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, (continued)
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, Nic Ferrier, 2001/12/03
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, David Brownell, 2001/12/03
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, Andrew Selkirk, 2001/12/03
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, David Brownell, 2001/12/03
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, dog, 2001/12/04
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, David Brownell, 2001/12/04
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, dog, 2001/12/04
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, David Brownell, 2001/12/04
- Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, Nic Ferrier, 2001/12/04
Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, Nic Ferrier, 2001/12/03
Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation,
Nic Ferrier <=
Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, Nic Ferrier, 2001/12/04
Re: [Classpathx-discuss] Activation implementation, Nic Ferrier, 2001/12/04