commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: [JEXL 2.0] o.a.c.jexl or o.a.c.jexl2 ?
Date Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:52:42 GMT
Hi,

Henrib wrote at Mittwoch, 18. November 2009 00:53:

> 
> 
> 
> Paul Benedict-2 wrote:
>> 
>> ...
>> Do you think this is beneficial to your users?
>> ...
>> 
> Who are JEXL users today? 

http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/commons-jexl/commons-jexl/1.1

Most prominent: Maven 1, ServiceMix and commons-scxml.

However, there are enough projects using older versions:

http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/commons-jexl/commons-jexl/1.0

Most interesting for us: commons-jelly.

> Is it better for them to be one compilation away 
> with no code change (based on known cases) or would they rather continue
> using an obsolete version?

Well, what do you do if you use commons-jelly, commons-scxml and
commons-jexl in combination?

> I'm a biased user and see Jexl as a coding "glue" convenient for dev teams
> and the compilation option suits me well. I also don't know how many
> active projects still use JEXL (besides Commons Configuration); its
> community is not very vocal... Thus the question trying to get other
> active users opinion. :-)

The question is, if it is a drop-in replacement. If not, you may not be able
to use the new version due to transitive deps.

- Jörg



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


Mime
View raw message