On Apr 19, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 4/19/07, Ted Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am uncomfortable with what feels to me like an architectural
deviation.
It would seem that an AG goal is portability to many platforms. This
seems implicit with java, and certainly depends on java being
supported on many platforms.
By using JLine, we are letting that package determine on which
platforms AG will run. I would feel more comfortable with this
decision if JLine were an Apache project. Going forward with JLine
raises the barrier of entry for a platform to support Geronimo: it
must insure that JLine runs on it, with possible native code
required.
Is this something we really want to do?
I'm not following your logic. According to the documentation, on
platforms where JLine does not have a native library, it uses
essentially the same code we used to use. So it doesn't seem to me
that there really are any portability limitations. It may "work
better" on certain platforms (that is, no possibility of password
characters appearing on the command line), but on all other platforms,
the behavior is no worse than before (that is, we try hard to wipe out
password characters, but the occasional one shows up briefly).
Still, back to the original issue, if there is some problem with where
we set the tempdir for various configurations (and therefore how JLine
deals with the native libraries), we should fix that.
Agreed. IIRC, we had a similar discussion when JLine was first
introduced into Geronimo. I'm comfortable with JLine. If there are
explicit issues, which we aren't recognizing, please let us know...
--kevan
