On 23 May 2017 at 17:17, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Yes, the >> code compiles and both can be on the classpath, but it is a pain to >> use, just a different kind of hell. > > I don't see what the problem is here.
Library A that depends on lang3 returns a Pair. Library B that depends on lang4 takes a Pair. Application cannot pass Pair from A to the B without conversion. My point is that it is possible to over-worry about jar hell. Joda-Time removed some methods when it went from v1.x to v2.x, but didn't change package name or maven co-ordinates. It was far more important that end-users didn't have two different LocalDate classes (a problem that couldn't be avoided when moving to Java 8). I've never seen any feedback about the incompatibility causing jar hell. The same is true here. It is vital to think properly about which is the worse choice, not just assume that jar hell must always be avoided. I remain completely unconvinced that removing these two problematic methods justifies the lang4 package name, forcing end-users to have three copies of the library on the classpath. It should need much, much more to justify lang4 package name. In fact I've yet to hear anything else much in this thread that justifies a major release. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
