On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 00:54, Berin Loritsch wrote: > > From: Paul Hammant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > On that note we previously voted on whether to split > > avalon-framework.jar into two* -> > > avalon-framework-api.jar and avalon-framework-refimpl.jar. > > Can someone run thru the votes and see > > if we got majority. It was a week ago I think. Can't do it > > myself as on webmail presently. Maybe > > it needs crisping up a little bit before enacting. > > I wasn't aware of that proposal/vote amid all the noise. > > -1 from me. There is no reason to split the framework into > two jars. Not only is it already small, but the default > implementations of the Configuration/Context/etc. are all > part of the interface. I can't imagine what gains can be > made by separating interface/implementation for the Jars. > What about the Parameters object? There is no separate > interface, although it is directly named in the Parameterizable > interface. It provides no real benefit that I can see.
The one benefit is for classes which have external dependencies (ie Logkit/Log4j etc). Splitting the jars makes it possible for us to keep LogKit/Log4j out of the base Classloader but we can still resolve them higher up in the chain where the classloaders are present. -- Cheers, Peter Donald -------------------------------------------------- Logic: The art of being wrong with confidence... -------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
