> from: Jeff Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From: Rodney Waldhoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Costin> If duplication is a concern - then just use > Costin> beanutils ( however duplication is explicitely > Costin> allowed in commons AFAIK). > > Robert> i've been convinced that beanutils is > Robert> not the right place for this code. > > Rodney> And I'm convinced that lang isn't the right place either. Let's > split the > Rodney> difference and propose commons-reflect or commons-reflection or > whatever, > Rodney> and end this thread. > Jeff> As I think several people have pointed out, isn't that what "clazz" is Jeff> supposed to be?
No. [clazz] is high level pluggable introspection. Originally [reflect] was proposed for low-level reflection helpers. However this got changed to [lang] because: - the package would consist of only 4 classes - it would still need to depend on [lang] - [beanutils] would thus have to depend on [reflect] and [lang] People seem to be loathe to include anything as a dependency in commons. [lang] got chosen to reduce the number of dependecies and small projects. This issue is all about dependencies and who does what. Commons could create 20 tiny jars easily, or it could create one [core] jar. Which is the right approach???? It was the first question I raised on joining, and we're still arguing about it. BTW. I agree that the [lang] charter would need to be reworked to clarify the inclusion of 'reflection'. Stephen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
