On 1/23/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For the core, I believe the external dependencies are Freemarker, OGNL, XWork, and Commons Logging. Of course, adding plugins adds dependencies, but that's another matter. My heuristic is to stay current with the latest production release, unless there is a problem. Otherwise, people using the framework may run into conflicts Since we are a major consumer of most of these dependencies, it follows that we have a responsibility to stay current and help vet the latest releases.
I agree in principle. I am just recalling some of the to-do over Commons libraries in the past and problems with version compatibility, etc. It's one thing for us to bump our compile-time dependency on something; it's another to then start capitalizing on syntax only available in that version to the point where rolling back later after problems are discovered is a serious challenge. For Freemarker, at this time, I don't see that as a problem. The release is mature, as far as open source goes. I'm +1 for moving to it. On this subject, what about commons-logging 1.1? It seems to have a few more compatibility issues (where more is > 0) as noted in http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/commons-logging-1.1/RELEASE-NOTES.txt In terms of calendar maturity, it's even older (May 2006) than Freemarker 2.3.8. Is it just an oversight that we haven't moved to it? or are the aforementioned compatibility issues considered more substantial? -- Joe Germuska [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://blog.germuska.com "The truth is that we learned from João forever to be out of tune." -- Caetano Veloso
