Howdy, I couldn't agree more, Senor Graham ;) Yoav Shapira Millennium ChemInformatics
>-----Original Message----- >From: David Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 3:17 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Logging packaging questions > >I don't work on commons-logging so I won't speak to satisfying your request >but I am curious about why you need this behavior. I would *never* allow >all of my apps to share jars between them and upgrade them all at the same >time. The amount of testing that would require is simply unreasonable not >to mention the fact that all apps aren't on the same development/deployment >cycle. IMO, sharing jars in this way is asking for trouble. > >David > > >> >> The jpackage project (http://www.jpackage.org/) is a volunteer >project >>devoted to providing clean linux rpm packages of java stuff. Since Linux >>core processes permit very fine control of what's actually installed on >>the system, one of our main goals is to enable component sharing instead >>of the usual java practise of having a copy of every single needed jar >>in every single app. Since every library is only installed once on the >>system, it must be installed right to please every user app. (OTOH this >>allows ugrading a component in every app at once instead of having to >>rebuild all the users). Applications use a common script framework to >>build classpathes out of available jars and/or create symlinks when they >>need directories of jars to run. >> >> This is a rather unusual setup (even if our users love it) and as a >>result we tend to find problems other people miss. The most recent one >>involves tomcat4,commons-logging and log4j. I won't bore you with >>technicalities (the whole discussion is available at the >>http://lists.zarb.org/pipermail/jpackage-discuss/2003-June/002084.html >>url, and I think it even overflows in a few other threads) but we found >>we needed some changes in commons-logging jar structure and we'd rather >>have them into jakarta proper instead of branching stuff (we've been >>providing official linux rpms of jakarta stuff and we'd rather keep it >>that way). >> >> Anyway : >> >>1. we absolutely need removal of the log4j classpath entries in the >>generated jar manifests (as a rule we consider classpathes in manifests >>evil since they result in subtle behaviours no human can really handle. >>They won't work most of the time and when they do it's not like the user >>intended). We do not want log4j stealth-drawn into the classpath if >>present like it is now and users want control of the actual logging >>backend used. >> >>2. we'd like the build-in backends split from the main jar so we can >>made them optional and allow people not to install them if they already >>have log4j or a 1.4 jvm. >> >>3. people have asked for further splittage of the backend glue so they >>can only install the parts relevant to the backend they'll actually use >>(ie separate log4j, jdk 1.4, avalon... parts). >> >> In linux speak that would get us : >> >>commons-logging frontend requires commons-logging-backend >>commons-logging-log4 provides commons-logging-backend requires log4j >>commons-logging-jdk provides commons-logging-backend requires java >= >>1.4.0 >>commons-logging-simple provides commons-logging-backend >> >>and so on, each package consisting of a single jar with no classpath in >>its manifest. >> >>I realise I've not been as terse as I wanted to so I'll stop now. Just >>ask if I wasn't clear enough. >> >>Regards, >> >>-- >>Nicolas Mailhot >><< signature.asc >> > >_________________________________________________________________ >STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged. This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else. If you are not the(an) intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system and notify the sender. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
