Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Migrate ical4j 3.x → 4.x #106

Closed
3 tasks
rfc2822 opened this issue Jul 26, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed
3 tasks

Migrate ical4j 3.x → 4.x #106

rfc2822 opened this issue Jul 26, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
refactoring Quality improvement of existing functions

Comments

@rfc2822
Copy link
Member

rfc2822 commented Jul 26, 2023

ical4j 4.0 will be released soon, and new development will then only be available in 4.x.

  • Wait until ical4j 4.x is released and stable
  • Create branch that uses ical4j 4.x
  • Make sure that everything is working (including tests)

Update: Because this is such a large change, we should do it with extreme care (as it has the potential to break DAVx5 in many ways), extensive testing and when it's time for it.

@rfc2822 rfc2822 added the refactoring Quality improvement of existing functions label Jul 26, 2023
@ArnyminerZ
Copy link
Member

Some annotations regarding the migration (updating):

  • Uses of obj is DateTime have been replaced with until.isSupported(ChronoUnit.HOURS), which should work fine as an alternative. Maybe it's not a bad idea to use DateUtils.isDateTime or create a shortcut of something like DateUtils.hasTime. This is because the new version uses Temporal which may be an Instant, a ZonedDateTime, or a LocalDate, to give some examples. So we can't use types here.

@rfc2822
Copy link
Member Author

rfc2822 commented Sep 24, 2023

Closing for when it's time :)

@rfc2822 rfc2822 closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Sep 25, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
refactoring Quality improvement of existing functions
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants