DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37153>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37153 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-29 12:52 ------- There's a strong argument for breaking the dependency on collections altogether. Dependencies cause problems for deep libraries and should really be minimized. One reason is the troubles caused when two deep libraries require differnt versions of a shared dependency. Another is to reduce the minimum size of download. I know that this is counter-intuitive but deep libraries are different from application code, frameworks and shallow libraries. The only collections class that is required is CursorableLinkedList. I've been thinking of ways to use some fancy footwork to include a repackaged version of the current released collections version. Alternatively, could just fork the source. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
