Sean Schofield wrote: >>@Sean: how come you say we did avoid a dependency on commons-lang for >>that long? I didn't have the feeling that we where trying to achieve >>this, correct me if I am wrong... > > > Well its just the less jars the better that's all. As Werner says > though commons-lang is pretty standard. I use it in all of my > projects at work. No big deal and I agree that copying and pasting > code would be absurd. > >
The main problem I see is if there is some kind of version interface break, you could end up with two different incompatible versions. How do the commons people handle that. I recently had a very similar situation, I ended up giving the commons-http with all its dependencies (including commons lang) its own namespace and left as only dependency commons-logging, because given my experiences, those interfaces are very stable. Do the commons people have a common criteria for this when to brake major interfaces if at all? But MyFaces is rather harmless in its dependencies, the worst cases probably I have encountered in libs you have to use constantly are probably Hibernate and all which comes along the jboss embedded line. They almost drag half of the commons libraries with them and a bunch of other stuff like JTA. Spring is rather unintrusive in their dependency use. And given the popularity of Hibernate, this could be really an issue in the long run, once some of the commons core libs breaks something. While commons lang is pretty save it is always something you have to have in mind.
