[jdom-interest] JDOM 1.1.1 release candidate

Brad Cox bcox at virtualschool.edu
Thu Jul 23 07:32:46 PDT 2009

Granted it sinks time. But don't blame that on OSGI. It's struggling  
(and sometimes failing) to provide a componetized model that can  
coexist with  the monolithic legacy libraries already out there. JDOM  
three problematic classes is only one example of why coexistence is so  
hard. That's hardly OSGI's fault. I give it points for even trying.

On Jul 23, 2009, at 10:20 AM, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Brad Cox<bcox at virtualschool.edu>  
> wrote:
>>> Jason, FYI the reason I stopped using JDOM after years of  
>>> satisfied use
>>> was inability to make it coexist with OSGI. As I recall, the  
>>> problem was
>>> trivial; 2-3 classes in the default namespace which gives OSGI  
>>> fits. Been
>>> awhile since I've looked tho.
> OSGI is a colossal time sink that only looks simple; but really,
> really isn't. I have learned this the hard way. It is poorly
> documented, and virtually untestable. It is like Maven on PCP.
> Please don't succumb to the temptation to make a few more changes just
> to support OSGI. If you want to support OSGI (which I'm finding to be
> a lot more trouble than it's worth over in XOM) then please do it in
> 1.1.2 rather than holding 1.1.1 for it. There are critical bug fixes
> in 1.1.1 that are useful without OSGI support.
> -- 
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo at ibiblio.org

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list