Also: * Spring may be "heavier" when it comes to API surface area and jar size, but Guice is actually more sophisticated and has a higher API power-to-weight ratio.
* Guice 4 is backwards compatible with Guice 2 (and Guice 1 for that matter). You should be able to just drop in Guice 4, run your tests and be done. I'm biased though. :-) Bob On Aug 13, 2013 6:55 AM, "Dave" <[email protected]> wrote: > -1 on switching to Spring DI for these reasons: > > * It's an arbitrary change: we should have a compelling reason before > making a dependency change like this > * Roller only has one dependency on Spring and one that can be easily > replaced with standard Java EE Container Managed Authentication or Apache > Shiro, etc. > * I know Guice pretty well and don't see the need to tackle a new learning > curve > > - Dave > > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Glen Mazza <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Team, I'm thinking it might be good to remove the Google Guice > > dependency from trunk and go 100% Spring DI. I'm sure Guice is a fine > > lightweight framework if you wish to avoid bringing in heavier Spring. > But > > we already are using Spring for DI and for security, and it isn't going > > anywhere, so we might as well use it throughout instead of mixing and > > matching two DI frameworks. Also, our Guice dependency is at 2.0 and the > > Google team presently has 4.0 in beta so what we have is rather old > anyway. > > WDYT? > > > > Regards, > > Glen > > > > > > >
