Tonny Staunsbrink wrote:
Hi All
I'm don't think there is a "right" answer on this issue. Embedding
your frameworks solves the problem of breaking API or introducing
bugs. On the other hand it makes it cumbersome to deploy bugfixes to
frameworks (when multiple apps are using the frameworks). It's the
same discussion as dynamic vs. static linking - the same pros and cons
(well, almost) - and i think it's worth to note that dynamic linking
is used alot.
I prefer to have my frameworks deployed seperately from the
applications (due to the ease of deploying updates). The risk of
breaking API should be a matter of developer discipline ;-) and
sometimes biting the bullet (rebuilding and redeploying every app when
some used API fetaure is completly removed).
Cheers
/Tonny
Personally, I've never liked the embedding of frameworks et al into an
application (although I did once work with a group of developers that
almost violently disagreed). I much prefer that all applications
benefit from bugfixes and performance enhancements as soon as possible.
It does require a bit of discipline to not break things but I think
ensuring that apps get the right set of bugfixes etc is at least as much
work. Of course, if your style is deploy-and-forget then embedding
frameworks is definitely the right way to go.
I believe a healthy combination of CVS-log monitoring (read them daily
and write good ones), JUnit et al, and black-box testing (JMeter,
HTTPUnit, et al) can keep an application functioning properly in the
face of frequently updated frameworks.
Just my 2p
-arturo
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [email protected]
