I agree, the less jars the better. As far as containers shipping with commonly used jar files, these common applications aren't standing still and we test with the specific jars are applications are using, wouldn't this be confusing and possibly waste more time that it saves.
Edgar > -----Original Message----- > From: Vic Cekvenich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 2:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Conversion to ToStringBuilder > > > The less jars, the better. > > I have like 2 dozen. I wish containers shipped with some > commons-* jars > and xml handling jars, like Tomcat does. > > Really, servelt 2.5 spec should state something like jars > needed by 80% > of apps (collections, beans, log4j, xmltypes suggested) > should be in the > container common lib. No, not the silly j2ee.jar which has > things that > are used by 15% of people (yes, it's a scientific #, it says > this, if I > do not need it, no one needs it). I mean even rt.jar is 18 > megs, why not > containers have some stuff, we already have class loader > issues anyway. bP is only 90K, but needs a lot of jars to wake up. > > I happen to use lang for other things so this one does not > help me and > it would detriment and active commiter. > > .V > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
