On 4/6/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Craig McClanahan wrote: > > On 4/6/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> With the new restructuring, we have three official Struts subprojects - > >> Action, Shale, and Tiles. Currently, Tiles > >> depends on Action 1, and through Action 1's EL artifact, Action 1 > depends > >> on Tiles. > >> > >> I propose we remove this circular dependency and move the > Tiles-dependent > >> EL tags into Tiles itself. The only other > >> dependency I'm aware of is Struts Blank, which I also propose we remove > >> its Tiles dep. > > > > > > Wouldn't this make Tiles depend on the EL artifact, even if you didn't > need > > it? Seems like the Tiles EL tags might really need to be their own > artifact > > that depends on Tiles and EL (as well as Action). > > Tiles can have multiple artifacts, I'm fine with that. I just want to > remove the circular dependency between the two > projects. Still, if we merged the code and kept with one artifact, sure, > the build would require EL, wouldn't the end > result require EL only if you tried to use those tags?
True. But it's this sort of "soft" runtime dependency that can confuse people too (and I'm as guilty of this with Shale as anyone else :-). How does one document the runtime dependencies in release notes or something? There would need to be asterisks that you would need EL, but only if you're using this particular subset of functionality. It's ok to keep it the way you propose, I guess ... but hard versus soft runtime dependencies is worth some thought across all of the artifacts, as we are reorganizing things. Don Craig
