Hi Tom,
no I have no specific reason but I'd like to know why it was chosen for the Scala based tools. Maybe the devs can say if there was a specific reason. For sure, using the same library for the Java tools makes the migration too smooth with the same way of parsing, checking arguments and so on. Thanks, Paolo. Paolo Patierno Senior Software Engineer (IoT) @ Red Hat Microsoft MVP on Windows Embedded & IoT Microsoft Azure Advisor Twitter : @ppatierno<http://twitter.com/ppatierno> Linkedin : paolopatierno<http://it.linkedin.com/in/paolopatierno> Blog : DevExperience<http://paolopatierno.wordpress.com/> ________________________________ From: Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 8:29 AM To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: From Scala to Java based tools : joptsimple vs argparse4j Hi Paolo, I don't have an opinion about which you should use, but I certainly agree that two option parsing dependencies appears to be 1 too many. Is there a reason why you prefer joptsimple? Cheers, Tom On 10 July 2017 at 08:38, Paolo Patierno <ppatie...@live.com> wrote: > Hi devs, > > > working on re-writing the TopicCommand tool in Java using the Admin > Client, I was asking if there is any specific reason why the Scala tools > use joptsimple for parsing command line arguments while the current Java > based tools use argparse4j. > > I'd like to use the joptsimple even for the "new" Java based tools. What > do you think ? > > > Thanks, > > Paolo. > > > Paolo Patierno > Senior Software Engineer (IoT) @ Red Hat > Microsoft MVP on Windows Embedded & IoT > Microsoft Azure Advisor > > Twitter : @ppatierno<http://twitter.com/ppatierno> > Linkedin : paolopatierno<http://it.linkedin.com/in/paolopatierno> > Blog : DevExperience<http://paolopatierno.wordpress.com/> >
