commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Kitching <si...@ecnetwork.co.nz>
Subject Re: [beanutils] remove dependency on commons-logging
Date Tue, 11 May 2004 23:10:58 GMT
On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 00:53, David Graham wrote:
> I was reluctantly in favor of copying certain Collections classes as a
> temporary solution to removing that dependency but I don't see why we want
> to permanently copy Logging classes to other projects.  Commons Logging is
> an abstraction for Log4j and java.util.logging; now we're going to add yet
> another abstraction above Commons Logging?  That doesn't make any sense to
> me.  

I understand your concerns. A layer between libs and commons-logging
does seem a little odd at first.

It would be nice if commons-logging were so small that it could be
copied in its entirety into each project, allowing every project to
access any logging library. However that isn't the case. Commons-logging
is small and stable, but not small and stable enough for that.

Duplication of code *is* a reasonable solution, sometimes. If you wanted
to sum up the values in an array of ints, would you find, download and
use a library that had that code in it, or would you just write the
necessary 3 lines of code? But of course anyone duplicating a complex
piece of code like a fourier transform would deserve a good LARTing.
It's a grey line.

I think duplicating one simple class and one interface in order to avoid
a dependency on commons-logging is reasonable. However I'm happy to go
with the majority opinion on that; as I said in another email, for the
work *I* do with java, bundling commons-logging is not an issue.

Cheers,

Simon



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


Mime
View raw message