Hi, I would suggest having both a monolithic and a set of modular packages just as Spring Framework distribution has. Of course from the developers point of view there should be more packages and projects to make things more decoupled and understandable. They can all be compiled into separate jars and also can be assembled into one big jar.
Greetings, Ersin Er http://www.ersin-er.name On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:31, Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 'Multiple' starts at 2 ;) > > I would suggest we start by reorganizing the packages first, and then > we may see if it really makes sense to split mina-core in 2 (or 3 ;) > > Thanks ! > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:25 AM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree with Maarten and Julien, multiple packages may make sense but I > > don't see any value to multiple jars at this point. > > > > We had talked about separating IoBuffer and a few other other base > classes > > that might have utility outside of MINA into their own jar at one point. > I > > still like this idea. > > > > -Mike > > > > Julien Vermillard wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> look like I agree with Maarten, > >> > >> the common package is bloated, we need to split in some packages. > >> > >> For multiple jar, I'm using maven it's not too much burden for me, but > >> it's hard to see the advantage for that move. > >> > >> Julien > >> > >> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 22:07:28 +0200 > >> "Maarten Bosteels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I fail to see strong advantages of having multiple jars. > >>> Having more packages seems like a good idea though. > >>> > >>> Maarten. > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Niklas Gustavsson > >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny > >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Niklas Gustavsson wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My feeling is that the cons outweigh the pros. Having multiple > >>>>>> JARs commonly turns out to confuse users, especially with a setup > >>>>>> where you can even get the very basic functionality working > >>>>>> without choosing your combination of JARs. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> With Maven, this is not really a big issue, IMHO. Consider that > >>>>> it's a one time burden... > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> My worry is not around how to perform the actual work setting things > >>>> up, but rather how much a potential consumer would have to > >>>> understand about MINA before she can get going. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> But even if we keep only one jar, I think we still have to create > >>>>> some new packages, because we have a big bag of classes in common, > >>>>> which make it quite difficult to find what are the relations > >>>>> between each classes. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I certainly agree. > >>>> > >>>> /niklas > >>>> > >>>> > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com >
