Hi.
Thanks for your work on the POMs, Michael !
About json-simple :
- I'm not against relying on an external dependency rather than using
shading, but github releases aren't directly available as maven
dependencies, you have to use third party tools like jitpack. Or maybe I
missed something.
- Optional dependencies impose a burden on the user (who will
typically hit an error message before realizing he has to declare
himself the dependency) - don't presume this tool will only be sparsely
used, generating json responses doesn't look so exotic.
I'm not *that* strongly opposed to your proposal, but we're speaking
about a 24K library whereas commons-digester weights 236K,
commons-beanutils 241K, velocity-engine 422K, velocity-tools-generic
231K (*with* json-simple inside, true), velocity-tools-view 116K...
So, should be shade the library or not, what's the real interest in
using an optional dependency?
Best,
Claude
how close are we to verion 3.0, what is holding us off?
I'd like to fix (VELTOOLS-174), VELTOOLS-178, and VELTOOLS-179 while
Claude should take a look at VELTOOLS-162/-174 and we are set. Some
docs and READMEs need an update too.
Did I miss something?
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@velocity.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@velocity.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@velocity.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@velocity.apache.org
