commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Loritsch <blorit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Clearing the air regarding Avalon utilities and Commons
Date Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:57:46 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

> On 12/26/01 2:55 PM, "Berin Loritsch" <bloritsch@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> We can have a second pool implementation.  There is nothing that prevents
> that.  Commons isn't a framework, so there is no requirement that we have
> just one of anything.
> 
> The hope though is that there aren't any specific structural requirements to
> using it (like having to have the rest of the pieces - logkit is an example
> of something that can be used indep...)


Now, I have a question regarding dependancies.  In Excalibur we can do this
because all the classes are in one project--but in Commons it may not work
like that.

For instance:

Excalibur pooling will depend on the Concurrent (threading) package to ensure
threadsafe access.  It will make sense to include a ThreadPool implementation
in the Concurrent package, but then we would have a circular dependancy.  There
are two ways of handling this: put the ThreadPool implementation in the Pool
package, or split the Concurrent package into two packages.

Neither are very clean.  I guess the Layered API approach would be most preferred.




-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message