Re: [id] util package

[Rob Oxspring <ro...@imapmail.org>]

(haven't studied [id] too hard so forgive me if I'm jumping in with 
potential nonsense)

Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> 
> So two solutions:
> 1) Create one package scoped utils class in [id] with just the relevant
> methods on it.
> 
> 2) Produce two multiple files - id-all, id-uuid and id-simple, the first two
> having a codec dependency.

Why do compiletime and runtime dependancies have to be blurred?  Sure 
the [id] project requires [codec] to compile for the uuid part but if 
people want to download and run just the simple stuff, they don't need 
codec.  [codec] becomes an optional dependancy that is required only 
when people try to load a class that uses it - obviously a docs issue is 
created but a simple FAQ should sort it.  Ant ran it's optional.jar this 
way for ages and it was pretty managable, at least while the number of 
dependancies was low.

Personally, I'd favour a single jar with an optional dependancy but its 
just another option in the cut'n'paste vs deep depencanies compromise - 
pleasing everyone is always going to be a struggle.

Either way, I'd avoid creating id-all.jar as having one jar containing a 
superset of another in the same release is confusing (at least to me) 
and opens the door to classpath hell.

Hope that helps,

Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

RE: [id] util package

[Tim Reilly <ti...@consultant.com>]

Right, I'm glad I asked.

I realize now based on the feedback from Tim, Rob, Stephen, and Phil it was
bad idea.
>From Stephen's post I realize I don't really want these util classes in the
public api.
The way it is now is fine by me.

Thanks,
-TR


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

RE: [id] util package

[Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com>]

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Oxspring [mailto:roxspring@imapmail.org] 
>
> Personally, I'd favour a single jar with an optional 
> dependancy but its just another option in the cut'n'paste vs 
> deep depencanies compromise - pleasing everyone is always 
> going to be a struggle.
> 

Copying that many classes from [codec] to avoid a Runtime dependency doesn't
seem worth the effort.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org