commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <>
Subject Re: [jelly] Gump failures
Date Sun, 04 Dec 2005 19:56:29 GMT
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005, Paul Libbrecht <> wrote:

> Do i not understand Gump or the fact that we stick Jaxen head is
> something that could be changed ?

It could, but one of the main points of Gump is that you don't.

In certain cases we know the HEAD of a project is going to develop
into a direction that is going to break backwards compatibility and it
is even intended to do so.  In these cases we pick a branch (like we
do for dom4j or did for commons-httpclient) or package up the version.

> Indeed, no-one really wishes to work with the latest jaxen
> currently.

Will Jelly work against Jaxen 1.1?  What are you going to tell your
users who want to combine Jelly and Jaxen and want to use the latest
released version of Jaxen?

Next to (1) turn off nagging, (2) make Gump use a packaged version of
Jaxen and (3) adapt to the changes in Jaxen there always is (4) make
the Jaxen developers fix the breaking change.

Note that I'm just stating the alternatives and to me (2) would be the
worst option, since it meant closing the eyes and ignoring future
problems.  But whatever you deem appropriate, go ahead and modify
Jelly's Gump descriptors.



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

View raw message