Re: [Proxool-developer] Logging class refactoring?

[Bill H. <bi...@lo...>]

Martin,

On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 06:11, Martin Crawford wrote:

> I guess the question is why refactor over redistribute? To make a single 
> JAR the Ant script could unjar the commons-logging JAR and then jar it 
> back in the Proxool JAR.

Yes, that is tempting. The trouble is that because the package names
would remain the same it would conflict with the *real* commons-logging
if that too was on the classpath. 

Most of the time, that would be just fine, but if the user upgrades to a
new version yet proxool.jar is first on the classpath then the user
won't get the upgrade! Or worse still, get compile time errors because
of conflicts between the classes of the same name. 

The refactoring is pretty simple so we shouldn't have a problem with
keeping up with the latest versions.

This sounds wise to me. Anyone?

Cheers,
-- 
  Bill Horsman
  Proxool
  http://proxool.sourceforge.net
  ICQ: 119577180