As long as that's possible, then I'm fine with it being a direct (but not runtime-required) dependency.
Robert On Dec 21, 2010, at 12/2110:58 AM , Andreas Andreou wrote: > Well, my thought was that it would be possible to architect ioc in > such a way that > the jsr jar isn't required at runtime (if users dont need its > features)... if that's not > possible, then i'm slightly leaning to having a separate project > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 18:36, Robert Zeigler <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'll offer a dissenting voice. :) I think it's not onerous for people who >> want them to add a dependency, but adding them directly to IOC introduces a >> potentially unwanted dependency to people who have no interest in using >> them. The jar may be small, but a lot of all, inused jars adds up quickly. >> I like having more control over what gets sucked intoy application ;) So my >> vote would be for a separate module. I wouldn't be opposed to the >> quickstart adding the jsr ioc module since that is easy enough to remove. >> >> Robert >> >> GATAATGCTATTTCTTTAATTTTCGAA >> >> On Dec 21, 2010, at 8:41 AM, Igor Drobiazko <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Ok, keeping own annotations makes sense. Do we want to support JSR-303 >>> annotations out of the box by adding a new jar depenency to tapestry-ioc or >>> would a new library make more sense? >>> >>> I tend to the outof the box soluton. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 08:58:40 -0200, Christian Riedel < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Igor, >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, guys! >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not sure about the deprecation but generally it's a good idea, I >>>>> think. Look at Hibernate and JPA for example. They have kept their >>>>> annotations and support the standard ones as well. I like the idea of >>>>> having >>>>> the choice... >>>>> >>>> >>>> I was going to post the same opinion. :) I think it wouldn't be hard to >>>> support both the Tapestry-IoC annotations and the JSR 303 ones. We'd just >>>> need to document which one Tapestry would check first and not allowing >>>> mixed >>>> use in the same class. >>>> >>>> By the way, thanks Igor for stepping up for implementing this. I hope I >>>> have time to team up with you in this project. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo >>>> Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer, >>>> and instructor >>>> Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda. >>>> http://www.arsmachina.com.br >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Igor Drobiazko >>> http://tapestry5.de >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > > -- > Andreas Andreou - [email protected] - http://blog.andyhot.gr > Tapestry PMC / Tacos developer > Open Source / JEE Consulting > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
