commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Stanley <mstan...@mstanley.net>
Subject Re: [email] Please add new build to ibiblio
Date Mon, 04 Oct 2004 12:41:56 GMT
Hey...

On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 19:58, Joe Germuska wrote:

> At 12:54 PM -0700 9/30/04, Martin Cooper wrote:
> >  > Hmmm..  Personally, I don't think putting it in a different package is
> >>  overkill.  Adding velocity requires the addition of Velocity.jar to
> >>  build, but not to run (unless of course, you use the class ;-).
> >
> >I'd prefer to avoid a required build-time dependency on something like
> >Velocity. Better would be to borrow the approach Commons Chain uses,
> >and only build Velocity-specific code if the Velocity jar is present.
> 
> I'm kind of ambivalent about this approach.  I would be concerned 
> that you'd be building jars which are supposed to represent the same 
> artifact but which have different contents based on the build 
> circumstances.  I guess also since I'm generally accustomed to using 
> Maven for builds, I don't really see the gain in conditional 
> compilation, because satisfying dependencies is automatic.


I agree with this as well.  If adding support for velocity adds a build
time dependency that people aren't comfortable with, I'd rather find a
different home, but I do believe this is the best place for it (as it is
probably common practice).  

I'd rather not see different build flavors.  That could seems to be more
confusing in the end.  I believe the added confusion doesn't justify the
gains.  


> 
> Do you suggest the conditional compilation because you don't want 
> people to have to bother with the dependency?  Or because you want to 
> make it possible for people to keep the Velocity dependency out of 
> their commons-email jar for some reason?
> 
> Joe

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message