You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to m2-dev@maven.apache.org by Jason van Zyl <jv...@maven.org> on 2004/10/25 16:39:12 UTC
Possibility of removing OGNL as a core dep
Hi,
I've just finished a bunch of work to remove xstream and xpp3 from the
core of plexus and therefore m2. This was partly an attempt to reduce
the size of the distribution and to reduce the possibility of conflicts.
Currently the generated distribution is 600k.
The last potential problem I see is OGNL which is a popular library and
I would like to avoid any potential conflicts. For what I'm using it for
in maven-core I could replace with 50 lines of code.
John, I know that you are using OGNL as the default expression language
for marmalade but we could just make this a dependencies for that mode
of operation, yes?
If this is possible I would like to take a bit of code that Bob has
lying around and remove the use of OGNL in the core. This would mitigate
any potential conflicts and it would make the core dist 450k :-)
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
jason@maven.org
http://maven.apache.org
happiness is like a butterfly: the more you chase it, the more it will
elude you, but if you turn your attention to other things, it will come
and sit softly on your shoulder ...
-- Thoreau
Re: Possibility of removing OGNL as a core dep
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@maven.org>.
On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 16:51, Brett Porter wrote:
> While this all sounds reasonable, don't forget it is also possible to
> repackage JARs. I'm not sure how it is done exactly, but several
> products do it so that they can avoid conflicts.
For the 50 lines of code I could take from Bob I don't think it's really
worth it. Though I did use that technique by absorbing the xpp3 parser
into plexus.
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 11:11, John Casey wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I see no problem at all with this approach. As a matter of fact, we
> >>don't even have to use OGNL for the marmalade mode. Marmalade-core ships
> >>with a basic EL provider which acts as a default. It's pretty basic, but
> >>we could easily use that as the default, and allow users to specify
> >>other el's a la carte.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Awesome, I will remove OGNL from the core then. This way we will pretty
> >much be impervious to any conflicts due to what we have in a core. Then
> >N different plugins can use M different versions of OGNL and it won't
> >matter one bit. Plus we'll get the added benefit of a 450k dist.
> >
> >
> >
>
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
jason@maven.org
http://maven.apache.org
happiness is like a butterfly: the more you chase it, the more it will
elude you, but if you turn your attention to other things, it will come
and sit softly on your shoulder ...
-- Thoreau
Re: Possibility of removing OGNL as a core dep
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
While this all sounds reasonable, don't forget it is also possible to
repackage JARs. I'm not sure how it is done exactly, but several
products do it so that they can avoid conflicts.
Cheers,
Brett
Jason van Zyl wrote:
>On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 11:11, John Casey wrote:
>
>
>>I see no problem at all with this approach. As a matter of fact, we
>>don't even have to use OGNL for the marmalade mode. Marmalade-core ships
>>with a basic EL provider which acts as a default. It's pretty basic, but
>>we could easily use that as the default, and allow users to specify
>>other el's a la carte.
>>
>>
>
>Awesome, I will remove OGNL from the core then. This way we will pretty
>much be impervious to any conflicts due to what we have in a core. Then
>N different plugins can use M different versions of OGNL and it won't
>matter one bit. Plus we'll get the added benefit of a 450k dist.
>
>
>
Re: Possibility of removing OGNL as a core dep
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@maven.org>.
On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 11:11, John Casey wrote:
> I see no problem at all with this approach. As a matter of fact, we
> don't even have to use OGNL for the marmalade mode. Marmalade-core ships
> with a basic EL provider which acts as a default. It's pretty basic, but
> we could easily use that as the default, and allow users to specify
> other el's a la carte.
Awesome, I will remove OGNL from the core then. This way we will pretty
much be impervious to any conflicts due to what we have in a core. Then
N different plugins can use M different versions of OGNL and it won't
matter one bit. Plus we'll get the added benefit of a 450k dist.
> -j
>
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've just finished a bunch of work to remove xstream and xpp3 from the
> > core of plexus and therefore m2. This was partly an attempt to reduce
> > the size of the distribution and to reduce the possibility of conflicts.
> > Currently the generated distribution is 600k.
> >
> > The last potential problem I see is OGNL which is a popular library and
> > I would like to avoid any potential conflicts. For what I'm using it for
> > in maven-core I could replace with 50 lines of code.
> >
> > John, I know that you are using OGNL as the default expression language
> > for marmalade but we could just make this a dependencies for that mode
> > of operation, yes?
> >
> > If this is possible I would like to take a bit of code that Bob has
> > lying around and remove the use of OGNL in the core. This would mitigate
> > any potential conflicts and it would make the core dist 450k :-)
> >
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
jason@maven.org
http://maven.apache.org
happiness is like a butterfly: the more you chase it, the more it will
elude you, but if you turn your attention to other things, it will come
and sit softly on your shoulder ...
-- Thoreau
Re: Possibility of removing OGNL as a core dep
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
I see no problem at all with this approach. As a matter of fact, we
don't even have to use OGNL for the marmalade mode. Marmalade-core ships
with a basic EL provider which acts as a default. It's pretty basic, but
we could easily use that as the default, and allow users to specify
other el's a la carte.
-j
Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just finished a bunch of work to remove xstream and xpp3 from the
> core of plexus and therefore m2. This was partly an attempt to reduce
> the size of the distribution and to reduce the possibility of conflicts.
> Currently the generated distribution is 600k.
>
> The last potential problem I see is OGNL which is a popular library and
> I would like to avoid any potential conflicts. For what I'm using it for
> in maven-core I could replace with 50 lines of code.
>
> John, I know that you are using OGNL as the default expression language
> for marmalade but we could just make this a dependencies for that mode
> of operation, yes?
>
> If this is possible I would like to take a bit of code that Bob has
> lying around and remove the use of OGNL in the core. This would mitigate
> any potential conflicts and it would make the core dist 450k :-)
>