Waldhoff, Rodney wrote:
>>I will certainly take a look at
>>Avalon. So why is there a commons pool
>>and commons dbcp if Avalon does the
>>same and more?
>
>
> I think it's the "and more" part.
>
Now to address the "and more" comment. The Avalon community is
sensitive to the fact that not everyone wants one big download
with a bunch of "and more" that they are not going to use.
To that end, We have been reorgainizing CVS and the build process
to support users who want the big download, and users who only
want one component, or one part of it.
We have a build system that recursively builds dependancies as
necessary, and yes our new layout looks suspiciously like the
Commons heirarchy. We *have* learned from Commons as well.
One of the things we hope to address in the very near future
is the website--which we know sucks. We have begun the
transformation, but we are not done yet so there are broken links
in the Excalibur area.
When we are done, it will be easier to tell what exists, what
the dependencies *really* are (not everything in Excalibur requires
Framework), and minimize the dependancy lists as much as possible.
Therefore, if you only want a command line package, we have a mature
one ready and decoupled from the system--with its own jar. If you
want pools--we have them too, already instrumented.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
