commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver Zeigermann <>
Subject Re: [proposal] avoiding jar version nightmares
Date Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:27:13 GMT
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:09:11 -0800 (PST), David Graham
<> wrote:
> The only time I've seen versioning problems is when commons components
> depend on each other and one of them breaks backwards compatibility like
> commons collections did recectly.  This is why it's so important for
> commons components to have minimal dependencies.

Just think of a 1.x version and a 2.x version having the same package
and class names, but different method sets or even different
semantics. Now in a large project a piece of software from one vendor
needs 1.x and another one needs 2.x. Now consider they really need to
share the same class loader and you are lost. You would not if you
could have both 1.x and 2.x usable at the same time. Daniel's proposal
would make this possible.


Disclaimer: Daniel talked this over with me in person yesterday, so
our points of view are pretty much aligned.

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

View raw message