On Mar 31, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Adrian Crum <[email protected]> wrote:
> I created the branch to address the concerns in the previous discussion about > the performance impact of removing Javolution. In other words, the branch is > intended to be used with profilers before the changes are brought into the > trunk. I don't think there will be any adverse effects of removing Javolution > - because I understand how it did its 'magic' in the Java versions prior to > 1.5. So, I need to find a way to convince others before I would be willing to > do the work in the trunk. > One good reason for removing Javolution is that it doesn't seem that the project is actively maintained anymore (even if I see that they are now working on a new release, after several years). By the way, when dealing with profiling/benchmarking you may find this useful: http://blog.javabenchmark.org/2013/02/benchmarking-with-junitbenchmark.html >> I am ready to commit some changes to disable selectively the specialpurpose >> components: as we discussed we could even exclude them from the build/test >> process by default (the idea is that maintaining them is "optional" i.e. it >> is ok to commit code to framework/applications that breaks them but of >> course we are happy to accept contributions to make specialpurpose component >> work)... in this way we could concentrate on a smaller codebase (framework >> and applications). > > Hmmm... I think I prefer removing Javolution from specialpurpose before we > remove specialpurpose. It is fine; just let me clarify that I didn't mention to remove specialpurpose from the trunk (only from the new release branch), only to disable some components. Jacopo
