commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Torsten Curdt <>
Subject Re: [net] binary compatibility be damned
Date Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:41:04 GMT
>>> * source compatibility for x.*.*
>> Disagreed. I can quote numerous examples of application servers that
>> come with varying versions of commons-foo, even within my employers
>> house. Your proposal would mean that I had to create varying jar files
>> of the applications shared library, depending on the application
>> server.

Why are you using the jars from the app server would be my question.

> We should not expect downstream users to change to a new binary API
> (new package) more than (say) once a year, if that.

IMO that's irrelevant as the users decide whether they upgrade or not.
Never change a running system. If you do - well, stuff might break.

Whoever is serious about avoiding jar hell inlines his dependencies anyway.
(see maven shade plugin)


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

View raw message