openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Patrick Linskey" <plins...@bea.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] required vs. optional dependencies
Date Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:44:19 GMT
>    - commons-logging-1.0.4.jar (used only in 
> CommonsLogFactory when logging is configured to use commons)

I think that we should leave this out altogether. Anyone who wants to
use commons logging will presumably have commons logging.

>    - commons-pool-1.3.jar (used only in 
> TCPRemoteCommitProvider for distributed data caching)

We should keep this, since it is required for one of our built-in
options, although it's unfortunate to have the extra dependency for just
one bit of code.

>    - geronimo-jms_1.1_spec-1.0.1.jar (used only in 
> JMSRemoteCommitProvider for distributed data caching)

We should leave this out, since anyone who uses the JMS RCP will need to
have a JMS server, and will therefore presumably have JMS jars.

>    - derby-10.2.2.0.jar (provided only as a convenience for 
> getting started with the examples quickly)

I think that we should keep this.

> My question: should we differentiate between the required 
> libraries and the optional ones (perhaps by putting them in 
> an /optional/ directory or something)? Does anyone have 
> experience with how this is done with other Apache projects?

I think that we should make the changes I outlined above, and we should
not create an /optional/ for other things.

-Patrick

-- 
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Prud'hommeaux [mailto:mprudhomapache@gmail.com] On 
> Behalf Of Marc Prud'hommeaux
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 11:31 AM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] required vs. optional dependencies
> 
> 
> Currently with OpenJPA, we ship with the following jars in the lib/
> directory:
> 
>    * commons-lang-2.1.jar
>    * commons-collections-3.2.jar
>    * geronimo-jta_1.0.1B_spec-1.0.1.jar
>    * geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar
>    * geronimo-j2ee-connector_1.5_spec-1.0.1.jar
>    * serp-1.11.0.jar
>    - commons-logging-1.0.4.jar (used only in 
> CommonsLogFactory when logging is configured to use commons)
>    - commons-pool-1.3.jar (used only in 
> TCPRemoteCommitProvider for distributed data caching)
>    - geronimo-jms_1.1_spec-1.0.1.jar (used only in 
> JMSRemoteCommitProvider for distributed data caching)
>    - derby-10.2.2.0.jar (provided only as a convenience for 
> getting started with the examples quickly)
> 
> The jars marked with stars (*) are the only ones that are 
> actually required for OpenJPA to function in the common cases 
> (the examples included in the distribution all run if you 
> have just the starred libraries + derby).
> 
> My question: should we differentiate between the required 
> libraries and the optional ones (perhaps by putting them in 
> an /optional/ directory or something)? Does anyone have 
> experience with how this is done with other Apache projects?
> 
> 
> 

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information  of  BEA
Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,
 copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received
this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.

Mime
View raw message