avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <leosim...@apache.org>
Subject Re: avalon-framework **Util.java
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2003 14:32:32 GMT
Peter Donald wrote:
> No comment?

not so sure (hence silent). I am wondering what the risk/benefit ratio 
is, where the benefit is AIUI small when you have a seperate interface 
jar already, and the risk is in such a thing breaking something 
somewhere, and it could be considerable. Surely, we'll have a circular 
dependency issue for a long time as we have to keep the classes in 
avalon-framework (probably as wrappers around the moved classes) as well 
for compatibility.

 > Just do it?

For changes like this to something as core framework, I prefer "vote 
first, act later" over "just do it", as a change like this could have an 
impact on quite a few projects, and a vote is a good means to draw 
attention.

cheers!

- LSD

> On Sat, 12 Apr 2003 08:57, Peter Donald wrote:
>>On Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:24, Peter Donald wrote:
>>>On Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:08, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>>>>Peter Donald wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>maybe. I would still just go the path of separating out things that
>>>>>needed separation due to external dependencies as many of my
>>>>>components use what would be considered "impl" parts.
>>>>>
>>>>>What we could do is migrate the Logkit adapter into the Logkit
>>>>>project and ask Log4j to host the Log4j adapter. Then we are left
>>>>>with just the XML deps which disapear as a problem in JDK1.4.
>>>>
>>>>The only problem with that approach is the circular dependency.
>>>
>>>thats a short-term problem. Maybe we should look at solving this over the
>>>longer term?



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org


Mime
View raw message