Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
>
> What's wrong with org.apache.slide for WebDAV components?
If we're not taking over the full Slide codebase,
and if Slide\{WebDAV-client} is not officially
declared dormant in Jakarta, then we'd have two
independent projects using the same namespace.
Since a WebDAV client based on the 4.0 HttpClient
will be incompatible, it's also a question whether
the same package names should be used. That will
create name clashes in applications that for some
reason - for example during migration - have to
use both old and new packages.
While Martin mentioned in the June board report [1]
that he would like to keep the Slide codebase in
one piece, the current state of the discussion tends
towards carving out the WebDAV client only. In that
case, I wonder whether we should position the "new"
component as a successor to Slide at all.
cheers,
Roland
[1] http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaBoardReport-June2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
