I'm still wondering what commons components caused you guys problems in your project? Why should all projects change to renaming packages and causing confusion if it's just a few projects that are causing problems? My guess is that it's commons collections that is giving you headaches but I would like to hear the real world example.
Thanks, David --- Oliver Zeigermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:09:11 -0800 (PST), David Graham > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The only time I've seen versioning problems is when commons components > > depend on each other and one of them breaks backwards compatibility > like > > commons collections did recectly. This is why it's so important for > > commons components to have minimal dependencies. > > Just think of a 1.x version and a 2.x version having the same package > and class names, but different method sets or even different > semantics. Now in a large project a piece of software from one vendor > needs 1.x and another one needs 2.x. Now consider they really need to > share the same class loader and you are lost. You would not if you > could have both 1.x and 2.x usable at the same time. Daniel's proposal > would make this possible. > > Oliver > > Disclaimer: Daniel talked this over with me in person yesterday, so > our points of view are pretty much aligned. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
