Guys, I have removed all hard dependencies upon commons-lang, as was
discussed in Aarhus, by forking the useful bits (the nestable exception
stuff) into net.sf.hibernate. We still need to distribute commons-lang
for now, because JCS requires it. New code should not use commons-lang.
On 23 Oct (12:44), Nikolay Ganev wrote:
I need to add and retrieve object to/from Hibernate Session. In other words I need 2
methods in session:
getObject()
setObject(...)
Why?!
--
Christian Bauer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This SF.net email
it sure looks like autumn-cleaning time ;)
Did you copy the exception stuff fromm commons-lang v1 og v2 ? (if v1,
I think i'll look into update it to v2 exception stuff
since that one include some better exception codebut i'll check if
they are worth it first of course ;)
/max
Gavin King
v2 :)
Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
it sure looks like autumn-cleaning time ;)
Did you copy the exception stuff fromm commons-lang v1 og v2 ? (if
v1, I think i'll look into update it to v2 exception stuff
since that one include some better exception codebut i'll check if
they are worth it
Just for those of us not in the loop, why was commons-lang ditched? Remove
another dependency? c-l getting to large?
Just so I know for future efforts...
Eric
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gavin
King
Sent: Saturday, October 25,
On 25 Oct (17:04), Eric Pugh wrote:
Just for those of us not in the loop, why was commons-lang ditched? Remove
another dependency? c-l getting to large?
Commons-lang version 2 is what, 10 times the size of v1? We only used v1
in one or two places, easy to replace. We even have some more
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program.
Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open
Source Community? Make a contribution, and help us add new
features and functionality. Click here:
The main reason is that commons-lang 2.0 is 100k of bloat and was not
fully backward
compatible. Also, all these dependencies upon commons- makes me
nervous since,
at least historically, the quality of most of the commons stuff was not
high.
Eric Pugh wrote:
Just for those of us not in
