2013/12/31 Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org>: >> > > The old OGNL (legacy) releases use the >> > > >> > > "package ognl;" >> > > >> > > declarations, where as the apache releases will use >> > > >> > > "package org.apache.commons.ognl;" >> > > >> > > I would create a set of proxy classes in the old package >> > space which >> > > call the classes in the new space. >> > >> > These will only be required for a small proportion of users, >> > so I suggest they are packaged in a separate jar. >> >> That was always assumed. The question would it be appropiate for an Apache >> release, or should it be released elsewhere. >> > > Our software usually uses the org.apache.commons namespace. I'm not sure if > this is an absolute requirement. To me it feels like these adapters should > be developed and maintained else where. Thoughts?
Introducing that proxies is a bad idea - Apache Ognl is a bit different beast than original Ognl and it will never be a drop-in replacement, you will have to migrate your code anyway. Regards -- Łukasz + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
