commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Schaible <>
Subject RE: Support for OSGi
Date Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:28:53 GMT
Mark Proctor wrote:
> Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> On 21.01.2008, at 10:08, Tom Schindl wrote:
>>> Hi Torsten,
>>> I understand this but we are seeing many J2EE-Servers adopting OSGi
>>> and many applications (I admit most of them in Eclipse-world) also.
>>> It seems strange to me in those envs to use this "artificial"
>>> package to overcome jar-hell (which is the only reason for the
>>> java5-package right?) they are not having
>>> because of OSGi.
>> Hm.... not sure why its such a big deal to have e.g.
>> o.a.commons.lang2 or similar. If you use an IDE that manages imports
>> you will barely notice anyway.
> personally I've always wondered why having a version attached to the
> namespace hasn't taken off more to deal with api breaking
> releases. if
> we had org.antlr1 org.antlr2 org.antlr3 life would be much
> easier. Sure
> you wouldn't get auto drop in jar and release, but I'm
> guessing tooling
> could make up for that in those cases.

Ironically Java could already support this, there's a reason why a manifest should specify
a Specification-Version. It would have been so simple to use this information also to separate
classes in a class loader. But the Gods of Java refused to make anything out of it ;-)

- Jörg

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

View raw message