commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <>
Subject Re: [beanutils] PROPOSAL: eliminate core dependency on collections
Date Sat, 08 May 2004 09:45:46 GMT
On 7 May 2004, at 21:06, Eric Pugh wrote:


> Unless users are working in an environment where minimizing the total 
> number
> of jars is crucial, I don't think cloning a dependency is worth it to 
> save a
> jar.
> Lastly, it seems like you end up removing a dependency on Collections, 
> and
> add a dependency on BeanCollections..  And now, as a user, I have to 
> make a
> decision on whether to include BeanCollections or not..   Which means 
> I need
> to learn more about BeanUtils to make an intelligent decision, which 
> raises
> the bar to use.

hi eric

i think that their are now two distinct target users for commons:

1 builders of applications
2 creators of libraries, frameworks and containers

we need to satisfy both sets of users.

i take your point but i think that it only applies to those in the 
first category.

those developers in the second category have been telling us that they 
need more finely grained and focussed libraries with fewer 
dependencies. (some of this has been positive - thanks dain :) - some 
in the form of negative 'jakarta commons is crap'.)

this has come to a head recently with the existence of two incompatible 
releases of commons collections. unless we act, developers in the 
second category will soon need to choose between dropping (or 
repackaging) their commons dependencies or telling their users that 
they cannot use the latest (and very much greatest ;) 

you're right that users in the first category need a simple install and 
prefer to get everything (rather than bits and pieces). we can probably 
distribute three jars:


together with a README advising people which ones to grab.

- robert

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

View raw message