On 20/03/2009, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Stephen Colebourne > > <scolebou...@btopenworld.com> wrote: > > sebb wrote: > >> > >> On 19/03/2009, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@btopenworld.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> So, overall, I'm dubious as to whether the value is sufficient to > >>> compilcate the compliation and to field the inevitable > >>> confusion/questions > >>> as to 'why we added a dependency' (when we didn't add one really...) > >> > >> Again, I'm not sure I follow. > >> > >> I don't see how the addition of a single new dependency complicates > >> the compilation. > > > > Because [lang] has no dependencies at present. That is a feature. > > > >> Nor do I see why users will be confused, so long as the site shows > >> that LANG depends on Java 1.5 only. Many of them will just use Maven > >> to pick up the new version. If necessary one can always add some > >> information on the site as to how annotations behave. > > > > But due to the way maven generates documentation, and the data in the pom, > > it will /appear/ like [lang] does have a dependency. > > > > Since most users are unaware that annotation dependencies are not needed at > > runtime, they will take the belt and braces approach and include the > > 'dependency'. Or stop using [lang]. > > > >> Indeed hopefully users will start adding annotations to their own code... > > > > This change doesn't actually help with that, other than providing > > advertising for JCIP. > > > > I'm basically -0 to this change, as I think the confusion outweighs the > > gains. > > > I agree with Stephen. > > As well as the point he makes its also causing the > net.jcip.annotations package to be included in the OSGi Import-Package > statement in the manifest which I assume will make this a required > dependency when using lang in an OSGi environment. I guess that the > maven-bundle-plugin can probably be configured to stop that happening > but even if it can then I don't really see the point of using this > over just plain comments in the javadocs. >
How did you generate the OSGI stuff? I've been experimenting with HC, and I don't see the same behaviour. > Niall > > > > > Stephen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
