FAQ
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

Search Discussions

  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 11, 2008 at 7:36 am
    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
  • Malcolm Edgar at Apr 11, 2008 at 10:01 am
    +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 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
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 12, 2008 at 9:51 pm
    Sometimes to get some rest from the daily routine, it helps to do a
    dumb task that requires no thinking or creativity... so this is what I
    just did... I took the Ashwood 1.1 code and created a new SVN project
    on ObjectStyle.org out of it:

    https://svn.objectstyle.org/repos/ashwood2/trunk/ashwood/

    Then I removed commons-lang references and submitted a new build to
    ibiblio. Once it gets posted, we can remove a few remaining commons-
    lang references from Cayenne and get rid of that dependency.

    Andrus
    On Apr 11, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
    +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
  • Aristedes Maniatis at Apr 14, 2008 at 1:19 pm
    I am also dead keen on upgrading the Hessian dependency to avoid some
    bugs and improve performance, but we are stuck there since Maven
    repositories are way behind with Hessian builds and the Caucho Hessian
    people can't get them upgraded without a lot of work (all sorts of
    voodoo with rsync is needed). I've already tested 3.1.5 extensively
    and it works great with Cayenne. [1]

    Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
    somewhere (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we
    don't get stung again by library versions we depend on being removed
    from maven repositories or not being updated when we want them?


    Ari



    [1] http://hessian.caucho.com/#Java


    On 11/04/2008, at 5:20 PM, 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




    -------------------------->
    ish
    http://www.ish.com.au
    Level 1, 30 Wilson Street Newtown 2042 Australia
    phone +61 2 9550 5001 fax +61 2 9550 4001
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 14, 2008 at 1:31 pm

    On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
    somewhere (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we
    don't get stung again by library versions we depend on being removed
    from maven repositories or not being updated when we want them?
    I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-collections
    or commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time,
    and not removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
    ObjectStyle. I'll do that tonight.

    Andrus
  • Malcolm Edgar at Apr 14, 2008 at 10:42 pm
    Hi Guys,

    On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
    commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on application
    servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers shared
    libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style applications its a
    difficult thing for your customers to deal with.

    regards Malcolm Edgar
    On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:


    On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository somewhere
    (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get stung
    again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven repositories
    or not being updated when we want them?
    I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-collections or
    commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time, and not
    removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on ObjectStyle.
    I'll do that tonight.

    Andrus
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 14, 2008 at 10:44 pm
    I am all for it, but isn't Velocity dependent on commons-collections?
    (Velocity would be the last one standing, with SQLTemplate depending
    on it, I don't see how we can get rid of it).

    Andrus
    On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:

    Hi Guys,

    On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
    commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on
    application
    servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers
    shared
    libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style
    applications its a
    difficult thing for your customers to deal with.

    regards Malcolm Edgar

    On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org
    wrote:
    On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
    somewhere
    (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get
    stung
    again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven
    repositories
    or not being updated when we want them?
    I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-
    collections or
    commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time,
    and not
    removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
    ObjectStyle.
    I'll do that tonight.

    Andrus
  • Malcolm Edgar at Apr 14, 2008 at 10:50 pm
    Oh, I didn't know that.

    regards Malcolm Edgar
    On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

    I am all for it, but isn't Velocity dependent on commons-collections?
    (Velocity would be the last one standing, with SQLTemplate depending on it,
    I don't see how we can get rid of it).

    Andrus


    On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:

    Hi Guys,
    On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
    commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on
    application
    servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers
    shared
    libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style applications
    its a
    difficult thing for your customers to deal with.

    regards Malcolm Edgar

    On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <
    andrus@objectstyle.org>
    wrote:

    On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
    somewhere
    (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get
    stung
    again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven
    repositories
    or not being updated when we want them?
    I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-collections
    or
    commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time, and
    not
    removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
    ObjectStyle.
    I'll do that tonight.

    Andrus

  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 15, 2008 at 10:00 am
    Looks like the new Velocity 1.5 also depends on commons-lang. Doh!

    http://velocity.apache.org/engine/releases/velocity-1.5/dependencies.html

    Wonder if there is an easy way to strip the template processing code
    and standard macros from everything else and include it in Cayenne.
    Then Cayenne classic will be fully self contained.

    Andrus

    On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:49 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:

    Oh, I didn't know that.

    regards Malcolm Edgar

    On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org
    wrote:
    I am all for it, but isn't Velocity dependent on commons-collections?
    (Velocity would be the last one standing, with SQLTemplate
    depending on it,
    I don't see how we can get rid of it).

    Andrus


    On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:

    Hi Guys,
    On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
    commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on
    application
    servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers
    shared
    libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style
    applications
    its a
    difficult thing for your customers to deal with.

    regards Malcolm Edgar

    On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <
    andrus@objectstyle.org>
    wrote:

    On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
    somewhere
    (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get
    stung
    again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven
    repositories
    or not being updated when we want them?
    I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-
    collections
    or
    commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time,
    and
    not
    removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
    ObjectStyle.
    I'll do that tonight.

    Andrus

  • Ahmed Mohombe at Apr 15, 2008 at 10:40 am

    Looks like the new Velocity 1.5 also depends on commons-lang. Doh!
    The most of java open source projects depend on commons-lang :).
    http://velocity.apache.org/engine/releases/velocity-1.5/dependencies.html

    Wonder if there is an easy way to strip the template processing code and
    standard macros from everything else and include it in Cayenne. Then
    Cayenne classic will be fully self contained.
    IMHO that would be too much work.

    However, using IntelliJ's refactorings and code inspections, it would be pretty simple
    to remove Velocity's commons-lang dependency.

    Since Cayenne is an Apache project, I suppose you have commit rights too, so this remove could
    be done pretty quickly in a branch.

    AFAIK the next version of Velocity should also increase it's JDK requirement so even more
    dependencies could be removed this way.


    Ahmed.
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 14, 2008 at 10:53 pm

    On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    I've already tested 3.1.5 extensively and it works great with Cayenne.
    Just put it on ObjectStyle. As I uploaded the jars and created the POM
    by hand, let me know if you have any trouble with it:

    http://objectstyle.org/maven2/com/caucho/hessian/3.1.5/

    Thanks
    Andrus

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
categoriescayenne
postedApr 11, '08 at 7:29a
activeApr 15, '08 at 10:40a
posts12
users4
websitecayenne.apache.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase