Please separate the jars at least by license !!
Having dom hidden in the classpath is plain hell for newbies !
Sax is much less dangerous but dom is really a pain, at least for the question of dom-level 2 or level 1 (which is kind of old time)...
I think it is immensely important for anyone receiving these APIs to be aware of:
- the license for each (among others, the, possibly limited, rights to redistribute)
- cleanly defined authorship and origin
Of course, if everything can be made "licensed by Apache foundation under the Apache license" than no-one has any problem with this. But I've never seen a copy of Jaxp (which should be with source then) under Apache license yet.
I would have hoped the maven notion of dependency to sort of cover the rights-management problem, doesn't it include little description such as: this package is in this jar, provided by this author/institution, licensed by this one, under this license ?? (the next step being an automation of rights-management, but that's another story)
Paul
On Mercredi, novembre 6, 2002, at 07:09 , Joe Germuska wrote:
Having been bitten by the same thing as James this week (using a Maven xml-apis.jar that didn't have the transformation part of JAXP), I would tend to agree with Shane -- just ship a single XML jar with all of JAXP, all of SAX, and all of DOM.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
