On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 02:10, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Jakarta Commons is recreating, piece by piece, various parts of Avalon
> and more than once I've heard strong suggestions that all should follow
> that "standard".
one way to put it.
> How should we deal with these issues?
cooperation to the maximum extent plausible :D
> Would it make sense to use Commons Logging interfaces and work with
> Commons configuration on Avalon 5?
I'm not sure whether it would make sense to use the commons-logging
interfaces as they are now (not familiar enough but heard people raise
issues). It does makes sense to combine forces.
I'm also not sure about commons configuration. One thing I like about
avalon-framework.jar is that I drop in the jar and then I have everthing
I need for avalon development (well I also need to drop in fortress.jar
but we're getting to that aren't we ;). I don't want to be dropping in a
configuration.jar, parameters.jar, logging.jar, etc.
This is something that can be worked out though, and we need to
definitely explore the option. Again, it makes sense to combine forces.
That said, there's the compatibility issue: I am not sure whether we
want to (for example) replace org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.Logger
with org.apache.commons.log.Log.
thinking some more:
import org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.Configurable;
import org.apache.commons.configuration.Configuration;
class MyComponent implements Configurable
{
configure( Configuration c );
}
looks a little ugly. I'd rather see
import org.apache.framework.configuration.Configurable;
import org.apache.framework.configuration.Configuration;
hmm.
cheers,
- Leo
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
