commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <>
Subject Re: [core] Scope, you choose!
Date Sat, 07 Dec 2002 06:26:31 GMT
Stephen Colebourne wrote:

>> Jeff said:
>> To say (as
>> has been said) that this approach is not code reuse but simply copying
> smacks of snobbery and is
>> incorrect.  It is a reuse policy that allows version-freeze on small
> portions of code.
> Copied code is copied code. It means dual maintainance and
> incompatabilities.

There is no dual maintainance. Everyone maintains the code that
he cares about and uses. 

> What I have consistently failed to understand about this debate is how
> commons can ask other jakarta projects to refactor out their common code
> when commons is unwilling to do the same job within its own borders.

Commons is not asking other projects to refactor common code just for the
sake of moving code around and creating dependencies. If someone feels 
a piece of code would benefit from having more hands and more diverse 
opinions - and is willing to take the risks of more diverse opinions - 
then commons may be a good idea. 

It is not in commons charter to create a one-size-fits-all introspection 

What I fail to understand is what is the real issue of debate - 
if you want to create a library for reflection, do it. 
That doesn't mean you have to force everyone to use it or to stop 
people from working on other reflection libraries or to say that the other
reflection code should move to your component.

If a piece of code works well, is stable, fast, clean and does
what it is needed - it will be used, and people will stop working 
on other implementations. If some other implementation does 
something different and people need that - then probably both
will exist for a while.

We must mind our own itches. That's the real issue that people 
don't seem to understand.  


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message