> We use some commons projects in one of our commercial products that > uses in-browser applets. Size is very important for some of our > customers who have clients connecting in from geographically remote > outstations over links with about as much bandwidth as a piece of wet > string. > > We ship the workstations with the JRE installed so that's never a > problem, but maintaining a connection long enough for the browser > download and cache all the necessary jars almost always is. > > Note that I'm not opposed to a consolidated commons distribution, it's > just that you should understand why size does matter for some > applications.
Sure, but how many users have that requirement? More than 1%? Someone that cares about jar sizes can easily use the right tools to reduce the footprint. IMO jar size should be less of a concern. That said I am still not sure what to make out the proposal. Less jar juggling - sure ...but also more dependencies of what needs to be fixed before a release. Plus (I am sure) people will be complaining that they "don't need all this stuff" - which is not that great from Commons' image point of view. cheers -- Torsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
