commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niall Pemberton" <niall.pember...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [BeanUtils] Progressing towards a 1.8.0 release
Date Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:47:06 GMT
On 7/19/07, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
> > On 7/17/07, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Assemblies work except you only get a default manifest - not sure
> >> where I got the attachment idea from, can't find any reference to that
> >> - so I think we should keep it simple and stick to option #1
> >
> > That has my +1 [obviously]. I think we should keep it simple.
>
> But surely, the problem is that maven will pull in collections.jar when
> it pulls in beanutils.jar, which is unnecessary. Its big, unnecessary
> dependencies like this that give commons a bad name.

Using maven2 we can specify the dependency as "optional" - which means
Collections won't get pulled in unless the depenency is specifically
defined in a users project:

http://tinyurl.com/2nm2bu

Again, just to repeat in case the point was missed - that optional
dependency already exists in commons-beanutils.jar for 1.7.0 - it just
wasn't declared in the pom (1.7.0 was built using ant). Bizarely there
is a pom (on ibiblio) for commons-beanutils-core.jar (which doesn't
have any Collections dependency) and that DOES have a Collections
dependency declared. So for BeanUtils 1.7.0 you get Collections when
you don't need it and you don't get it when you do need it!!!

Niall

> Anyway, I'll not block this, if this is the way you want to go.
>
> Stephen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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