commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [LANG] 3.0 JCIP Annotations
Date Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:22:36 GMT
On 20/03/2009, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Stephen Colebourne
>
> <scolebourne@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>  > sebb wrote:
>  >>
>  >> On 19/03/2009, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>  >>>
>  >>>  So, overall, I'm dubious as to whether the value is sufficient to
>  >>> compilcate the compliation and to field the inevitable
>  >>> confusion/questions
>  >>> as to 'why we added a dependency' (when we didn't add one really...)
>  >>
>  >> Again, I'm not sure I follow.
>  >>
>  >> I don't see how the addition of a single new dependency complicates
>  >> the compilation.
>  >
>  > Because [lang] has no dependencies at present. That is a feature.
>  >
>  >> Nor do I see why users will be confused, so long as the site shows
>  >> that LANG depends on Java 1.5 only.  Many of them will just use Maven
>  >> to pick up the new version. If necessary one can always add some
>  >> information on the site as to how annotations behave.
>  >
>  > But due to the way maven generates documentation, and the data in the pom,
>  > it will /appear/ like [lang] does have a dependency.
>  >
>  > Since most users are unaware that annotation dependencies are not needed at
>  > runtime, they will take the belt and braces approach and include the
>  > 'dependency'. Or stop using [lang].
>  >
>  >> Indeed hopefully users will start adding annotations to their own code...
>  >
>  > This change doesn't actually help with that, other than providing
>  > advertising for JCIP.
>  >
>  > I'm basically -0 to this change, as I think the confusion outweighs the
>  > gains.
>
>
> I agree with Stephen.
>
>  As well as the point he makes its also causing the
>  net.jcip.annotations package to be included in the OSGi Import-Package
>  statement in the manifest which I assume will make this a required
>  dependency when using lang in an OSGi environment. I guess that the
>  maven-bundle-plugin can probably be configured to stop that happening
>  but even if it can then I don't really see the point of using this
>  over just plain comments in the javadocs.
>

How did you generate the OSGI stuff?

I've been experimenting with HC, and I don't see the same behaviour.

>  Niall
>
>
>
>  > Stephen
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message