I'm allergic to re-namespacing... why do you think that we should do so?
-Patrick On 6/4/07, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would suggest using backports and repackaging -- though I have trouble imaging the interfaces on backports changing. I, personally, am of the opinion that if at all possible, small dependencies should be re-namespaced and bundled. -Brian On Jun 4, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote: > Hi, > > In the process of doing some concurrency-related work on OpenJPA, I've > run across the need for a ReentrantReadWriteLock, akin to what is in > Java 5's java.util.concurrent package, Emory University's > edu.emory.mathcs.backport package, and Doug Lea's EDU.oswego.cs.dl > package. > > Currently, OpenJPA has repackaged copies of some of the code from > EDU.oswego.cs.dl, but not everything. I'd like to get rid of the > repackaged copies, and move to the versions in > edu.emory.mathcs.backport. According to Doug Lea's website, the > backport classes are preferable to the EDU.oswego.cs.dl classes at > this point. > > This change is independent of future changes to allow for pluggability > of the concurrent implementation, and only impacts those classes that > we are already directly repackaging. > > Thoughts? > > -Patrick > > -- > Patrick Linskey > 202 669 5907
-- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907
