On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 11:20 +0100, Boris Unckel wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 10:40 +0100, Boris Unckel wrote: > > > Just as suggestion: > > > There are some commons-logging compile dependencies. The manifest allows > > > proprietary entries. It would be nice to have names and versions for > > > dependet jars in the jar. > > > > There aren't actually any *mandatory* dependencies; JCL can run > > stand-alone. The user *might* want log4j or *might* want > > avalon-framework, but that's up to them. > Sorry for not precise enough. I do not want to represent the runtime > dependencies or all compiletime dependencies for a special case. > The manifest should just represent against which APIs and their versions it > was actually compiled. > So if someone did not compile against avalon and just uses log4j - OK. The > manifest represents just log4j and its version. > > Optional fulfilled dependeny => entry in the manifest > Optional ignored dependeny => _no_ entry in the manifest
I don't quite understand what you mean. The JCL distribution is *compiled* against all of the libraries it supports (about 5 of them), creating the appropriate adapter classes. It is then shipped with all of the adapters but none of those libraries, and the user provides whichever one they want to use for a particular app. Listing all of these libraries as "dependencies" seems misleading, as JCL can run fine with none of them (using its internal SimpleLog or NoOpLog). Regards, Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
