You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwebbeans.apache.org by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> on 2009/01/11 12:45:03 UTC
Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
Fwik Javassist uses a Mozilla Public License 1.1 not a pure LGPL (though I've not checked explicitly for the javassist version we use).
MPL 1.1 is explicitly listed as appropriate license at least.
Maybe we can kick scannotation, and do the scanning ourself (in a later phase). But Javassist is imho a big deal, because we don't need to class-load all classes.
Otoh I have to admit that I've never did any performance/memory tests comparing them both.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> schrieb am So, 11.1.2009:
> Von: Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
> An: "MyFaces Development" <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
> Datum: Sonntag, 11. Januar 2009, 12:06
> On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 19:56 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Jan-Kees van Andel
> > <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't think Scannotation itself is an
> issue, but it has a required
> > > dependency on Javassist, which has an LGPL
> license. Isn't that a
> > > problem?
> >
> > hrm, I think not really, b/c it's not a direct
> dependency.
>
> I'm pretty sure that scannotation's dependency on
> an LGLP project is a
> showstopper. There is some brief info here:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
> I'm not sure this approach is a good one anyway.
> Javasisst's jar is
> 560kb. That's a fairly heavy dependency for such a
> simple task as
> scanning for annotations.
>
> Regards,
> Simon
Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
Yep, I should have checked the original statement. The javassist website
here:
http://www.jboss.org/javassist/
states clearly that:
<quote>
License: You can choose either MPL or LGPL.
</quote>
Surprising for a jboss project, but the website clearly says so.
The MPL is no problem. So using Scannotation is also fine.
I'm still not convinced that adding a 560kb dependency for such a simple task is optimal, but simply getting *any* solution in place for myfaces is better than doing multiple scans. It can always be further improved later..
Regards, Simon
On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 11:45 +0000, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Fwik Javassist uses a Mozilla Public License 1.1 not a pure LGPL (though I've not checked explicitly for the javassist version we use).
>
> MPL 1.1 is explicitly listed as appropriate license at least.
>
> Maybe we can kick scannotation, and do the scanning ourself (in a later phase). But Javassist is imho a big deal, because we don't need to class-load all classes.
> Otoh I have to admit that I've never did any performance/memory tests comparing them both.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> --- Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> schrieb am So, 11.1.2009:
>
> > Von: Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>
> > Betreff: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
> > An: "MyFaces Development" <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
> > Datum: Sonntag, 11. Januar 2009, 12:06
> > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 19:56 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf
> > wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Jan-Kees van Andel
> > > <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I don't think Scannotation itself is an
> > issue, but it has a required
> > > > dependency on Javassist, which has an LGPL
> > license. Isn't that a
> > > > problem?
> > >
> > > hrm, I think not really, b/c it's not a direct
> > dependency.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure that scannotation's dependency on
> > an LGLP project is a
> > showstopper. There is some brief info here:
> > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> >
> > I'm not sure this approach is a good one anyway.
> > Javasisst's jar is
> > 560kb. That's a fairly heavy dependency for such a
> > simple task as
> > scanning for annotations.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Simon
>
>
>