+1 to remove the dependency, because if the commons-lang upgrade has
changed its API or behaviour, this may introduce issues with code
dependent on 2.1
regards Malcolm Edgar
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> Although ... this would require us to clean up Ashwood from commons.lang
> dep... Since Andriy doesn't seem to be coming back to Java, I may actually
> fork the Ashwood code and do a bit of tweaking to strip the parts we are not
> using for Cayenne and remove the commons-lang dep.
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>
> > Hmm... we only use a handful of classes from commons-lang...
> ToStringBuilder, HashCodeBuilder, EqualsBuilder and a few more... I think I
> may simply pull them to "org.apache.cayenne.util" and drop the dependency.
> We'll end up with leaner Cayenne and fewer dependencies to manage.
> >
> > Andrus
> >
> >
> > On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Hi Borut,
> > >
> > > I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in the
> days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of users,
> upgrading too eagerly affects another...
> > >
> > > Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of days,
> and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea, I'll go ahead
> with it.
> > >
> > > Andrus
> > >
> > >
> > > On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrus,
> > > >
> > > > can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
> commons.lang
> > > > library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Borut
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Apr 11 2008 - 06:01:49 EDT