Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #19566 > unrolled thread

Apache Commons abandoned ?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Apache Commons abandoned ? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2012-10-31 03:12 +0100
    Re: Apache Commons abandoned ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-10-30 22:49 -0400
      Re: Apache Commons abandoned ? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2012-10-31 04:14 +0100
        Re: Apache Commons abandoned ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-10-30 23:36 -0400
          Re: Apache Commons abandoned ? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 12:27 -0700
    Re: Apache Commons abandoned ? markspace <-@.> - 2012-10-30 20:02 -0700

#19566 — Apache Commons abandoned ?

Hello,

looking for a proper solution to deal with Windows style INI files, I was
linked to the Apache Commons Configurations library. While it looks like
what I want, I was surprised and dismayed to notice that a lot of the
Apache Common libraries seem to have been completely abandoned. Many have
not have had any updates since 2008 or 2010, and some even are specifically
designed to still run on Java 1.2!

Are those libraries so incredibly polished that no further updates are
necessary, or have they simply been abandoned ? Looking in from the
outside, it seems like no maintenance or anything has been done, and I'm a
bit worried about adding something that is explicitly 1.2-compatible to my
build path.

Anyone familiar with the communities surrounding these libraries ? Hard to
tell from the outside.

Liebe Gruesse,
		Joerg

-- 
Ich lese meine Emails nicht, replies to Email bleiben also leider
ungelesen.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#19568

On 10/30/2012 10:12 PM, Joerg Meier wrote:
> looking for a proper solution to deal with Windows style INI files, I was
> linked to the Apache Commons Configurations library. While it looks like
> what I want, I was surprised and dismayed to notice that a lot of the
> Apache Common libraries seem to have been completely abandoned. Many have
> not have had any updates since 2008 or 2010, and some even are specifically
> designed to still run on Java 1.2!
>
> Are those libraries so incredibly polished that no further updates are
> necessary, or have they simply been abandoned ? Looking in from the
> outside, it seems like no maintenance or anything has been done, and I'm a
> bit worried about adding something that is explicitly 1.2-compatible to my
> build path.
>
> Anyone familiar with the communities surrounding these libraries ? Hard to
> tell from the outside.

If Apache stops a project then they state that very explicit. No such
statement means that it is still active.

Some projects is not updated frequently. Maybe because there is
no need. Maybe because no committer has time to do it.

I do not see running on Java 1.2 as a problem. It was probably started
when 1.2 was relevant and why break the capability if not needed.

Apache Commons Configurations do have recent updates:

Version	Date	Description
2.0	in SVN	TBD
1.9	2012-08-22	Minor bug fixes and improvements
1.8	2012-02-04	Support for Java 1.5
1.7	2011-09-07	Many bugfixes, some new features.
1.6	2008-12-25	Another set of smaller bug fixes
1.5	2007-11-24	Many smaller bugfixes
1.4	2007-04-08	Improved interpolation, configuration for INI files, 
reloading strategy triggered with JMX, bug fixes.
1.3	2006-09-24	

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19571

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:49:36 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> I do not see running on Java 1.2 as a problem. It was probably started
> when 1.2 was relevant and why break the capability if not needed.

Running on Java of course is not a problem in and of itself, but software
being specifically tailored to run on 1.2 kind of seems like it's pretty
ancient.

> Apache Commons Configurations do have recent updates:

Yeah, in this case I was referring to it's dependencies (lang 2.6, which is
the 1.2 version, instead of lang 3.1, last updated in January 2011,
collections, last updated in April 2008, and logging, last updated in 2007,
almost 5 years ago).

Liebe Gruesse,
		Joerg

-- 
Ich lese meine Emails nicht, replies to Email bleiben also leider
ungelesen.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19572

On 10/30/2012 11:14 PM, Joerg Meier wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:49:36 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> I do not see running on Java 1.2 as a problem. It was probably started
>> when 1.2 was relevant and why break the capability if not needed.
>
> Running on Java of course is not a problem in and of itself, but software
> being specifically tailored to run on 1.2 kind of seems like it's pretty
> ancient.

If you have some software that was started 10 years ago and back then
it was decided to support 1.2, then it makes sense to keep that support
if there are no significant gain by dropping it.

Being backwards compatible unless very good reasons exists for not
being it is not ancient.

>> Apache Commons Configurations do have recent updates:
>
> Yeah, in this case I was referring to it's dependencies (lang 2.6, which is
> the 1.2 version, instead of lang 3.1, last updated in January 2011,
> collections, last updated in April 2008, and logging, last updated in 2007,
> almost 5 years ago).

Are there any inventions in collections or logging since 2008/2007 that
you miss?

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19577

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> Joerg Meier wrote:
>> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> I do not see running on Java 1.2 as a problem. It was probably started
>>> when 1.2 was relevant and why break the capability if not needed.
> 
>> Running on Java of course is not a problem in and of itself, but software
>> being specifically tailored to run on 1.2 kind of seems like it's pretty
>> ancient.

"Seems" is such a weasel word. Who does the "seeming"? It *seems* like 
you're trying to avoid responsibility for your judgment.

And it *seems* like you ignored that the library was updated for Java 5 
compatibility, undercutting your very assumption.

> If you have some software that was started 10 years ago and back then
> it was decided to support 1.2, then it makes sense to keep that support
> if there are no significant gain by dropping it.
> 
> Being backwards compatible unless very good reasons exists for not
> being it is not ancient.
> 
>>> Apache Commons Configurations do have recent updates:
>>
>> Yeah, in this case I was referring to it's [sic] dependencies (lang 2.6, which is
>> the 1.2 version, instead of lang 3.1, last updated in January 2011,
>> collections, last updated in April 2008, and logging, last updated in 2007, 
>> almost 5 years ago).

Why are you so scared of something not updated in a while?

Rapid updates are not a bellwether of good quality.

> Are there any inventions in collections or logging since 2008/2007 that
> you miss?

Is there anything preventing you from using the packages under Java 7 with 
the latest Collections library?

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19569

On 10/30/2012 7:12 PM, Joerg Meier wrote:
> I was surprised and dismayed to notice that a lot of the
> Apache Common libraries seem to have been completely abandoned. Many have
> not have had any updates since 2008 or 2010, and some even are specifically
> designed to still run on Java 1.2!
>
> Are those libraries so incredibly polished that no further updates are
> necessary, or have they simply been abandoned ?


Software does eventually have to be abandoned.  Sometimes it is 
superseded by something better.  Sometimes the need for it just goes away.

For Apache.org, check out the Apache Attic to see if a project is 
officially retired.

<http://attic.apache.org/>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web