On Jun 3, 2012, at 11:40, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I propose that we, in the immediate future, reorganize [classscan] > into multiple modules. I fully expect that by the time we get > everyone's input/features/alternative implementations for X/Y/Z in > place, we will want the flexibility. I am fine with starting small, > e.g. core/bcel modules, although I would expect that bcel might > eventually be moved beneath another division of "scanners" or the > like. > > The technical hurdle to doing this is that MetaRegistry currently > references oacc.bcel.Cache, mapping it to its SINGLETON reference. I > don't see that this is necessary; I would prefer that the bcel module > provide an entry in META-INF/services. It's not even necessary that > we upgrade to Java 6 for this; Java 6 users can use ServiceLoader > while those using Java 5 can use whatever workalike option they prefer > or instantiate the MetaRegistry implementation directly. In any case > core should not depend on a particular scanning package/module. I > don't JFDI because (a) I don't have time just at the moment, and (b) I > like consensus. Thoughts?
Forget java 5 and use 6. Gary > > Matt > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
