Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > > :) Sounds good to me. Now what do you think of using the > things from > > Avalon that are good (for us)? Now, I think, some of the interfaces > > (for logging, contextualization, initialization) are good > and we could > > directly use them instead of building just a clone of them. > > There are two issues here, Carsten. One is about the present > and another is about the future. Present indicates that > reusing what's available is great, future indicates that if > we keep dependencies on > org.apache.avalon.* namespace we either end up forking it or, > more likely, we have potential classloading collision issues > in the future with things that avalon might produce. > > remember the rhino classloading problem with weblogic? same thing. > Sure.
> I strongly suggest that we start with org.apache.cocoon.* to > avoid these problems down the road (including, yes, gump problems) > Yes, I understand of course all these problems, but I'm really afraid of changing all the components now from Avalon interfaces to Cocoon interfaces which are more or less the same but just use a different package. In that case these components run in Cocoon but not in any other container anymore that provides Avalon compatibility. And that's imho bad. Not every project uses Cocoon, so it's absolutely preferable to have components that I can use in several projects. Ok, I think if we decide to use our own versions of the interfaces it will still be possible to do some hacky things and still provide compatilibity with the Avalon versions. So what do others think? Carsten
