|
From: Brandon G. <Bra...@pl...> - 2004-04-06 18:59:18
|
Let me be very clear. I have no problem with people writing plugins. I'm not saying we should limit options. That is silly. What I am saying is that keeping the choices more cleanly separated is of greater importance. As the Spring community grows and compelling and useful products become available are we going to include them all into spring? Wouldn't it be better to separate them out beyond the spring-*.jar files and allow for developers to assemble their needs. I don't see how what I am suggesting contradicts or compromises any of what you guys are saying. I think the linux model is very compelling. Make the Spring core it's own product, make the MVC it's own product, make the ibatis support it's own product, etc... This is not a difficult concept and it is being used quite successfully. I think this would be a better move towards the scalability of the Spring community. What is the philosophy that draws the line with what is and is not part of Spring? In my opinion that line needs to be drawn a little further back than it currently is. Take a look at the pear.php.net project or the gentoo.org linux distro or eclipse.org. All of these focus on a core and provide extensions/plugins to the core. All are wildly successful. So, what is the compelling argument to do otherwise? So far everyone one has simply been restating shared goals not really explaining why they prefer the all in one approach of distribution. Brandon Goodin >>> se...@eh... 4/6/2004 12:15:48 PM >>> Peter den Haan wrote: > The Spring core supports JDBC, iBatis, JDO and Hibernate data access > technology. It supports Hessian, Burlap, JAX-RPC and RMI remoting. I don't > think any of this has proved to be a problem. It supports JSP, Freemarker > and Velocity, and I can't remember anyone asking which was the "official" > spring view technology. Aren't we fighting windmills here? > > I must admit that I find the Apache Commons validator an infuriating product > because it is pretty good in some ways and absolutely horrible in others, > and I would look forward to a clean, flexible and pluggable native Spring > solution. Until then it seems to me that a validator adapter fits entirely > into the Spring philosophy as it stands. Just wanted to put my support behind this statement. To me, Spring's advantage is that it's engineered so well that many different implementations can plug into it. It gives the developer (me) a choice. Everything's behind a nice set of interfaces, and I have never felt that a technology is integrated poorly. As long as a particular implementation doesn't impose its whim on the core Spring design, I will always welcome the amazing integration and choices offered by Spring. Seth ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Springframework-developer mailing list Spr...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer |
|
From: Brandon G. <Bra...@pl...> - 2004-04-06 19:50:21
|
ya matt I am aware of the different distros...Thanks for your input. >>> li...@ra... 4/6/2004 1:41:04 PM >>> > Make the > Spring core it's own product, make the MVC it's own product, make > the ibatis support it's own product, etc... This is not a difficult > concept and it is being used quite successfully. I think this would > be a better move towards the scalability of the Spring community. I'm assuming you're aware that Spring ships as 1 JAR or 7 separate JARs? http://jroller.com/page/raible?anchor=yeah_it_s_good This might not be what's in the CVS tree - but I'd argue that the distribution is more important than the CVS hierarchy. As for "too many choices" - that can easily be resolved with a sample app that shows the recommended choices. Matt ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Springframework-developer mailing list Spr...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer |
|
From: Seth L. <se...@eh...> - 2004-04-06 19:10:09
|
> and provide extensions/plugins to the core. All are wildly successful. > So, what is the compelling argument to do otherwise? So far everyone one > has simply been restating shared goals not really explaining why they > prefer the all in one approach of distribution. To answer your question: Personally, I hate having to go out and download 20 different jars. I hate having to work out interdependencies. I hate resolving classpath issues after finding out I'm missing yet another jar. I like it when projects include all their 3rd party jars needed to work instead of making me go out and get them. I like it when I download a single tarball for a project. Spring even has the best of two worlds here: I can download two different distributions, one w/ dependencies and one without. They also make it really nice and create an uberjar or different specific jars. So, Spring is nice because the distribution is nice. Seth |
|
From: Matt R. <li...@ra...> - 2004-04-06 19:41:06
|
> Make the > Spring core it's own product, make the MVC it's own product, make > the ibatis support it's own product, etc... This is not a difficult > concept and it is being used quite successfully. I think this would > be a better move towards the scalability of the Spring community. I'm assuming you're aware that Spring ships as 1 JAR or 7 separate JARs? http://jroller.com/page/raible?anchor=yeah_it_s_good This might not be what's in the CVS tree - but I'd argue that the distribution is more important than the CVS hierarchy. As for "too many choices" - that can easily be resolved with a sample app that shows the recommended choices. Matt |