On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Mibu <mibu.cloj...@gmail.com> wrote: > For me as a user, the appeal of contrib was the bundling. I used to > just download the latest contrib jar, throw it in the classpath, and > have plenty of functionality that could be easily summoned using a > single line of code. Just like a standard library, even though it's > not officially standard. It's the "batteries included" way which > established itself as an important aspect of modern programming. Now > if you need something in contrib, it's a chore. > > To pre-empt the argument for automation tools/libs: I'm not big on > those. They change too often; they feel patchy, and they add, in my > opinion, an unnecessary layer of incidental complexity between me and > my code. > > If you separate the libs then I can't see a difference or advantage > from the "third party" libs. The separate libs will not be considered > standard and therefore not be extensively deployed, and therefore not > be extensively used or fixed or improved or held to a higher standard. > > I understand the problems of contrib in one repository, yet I can't > help but feel unbundling is a step in the wrong direction.
+1 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
