Support for Servlet 3.1

[Lukáš Fryč]

Agree, until Java 8 arrives to masses, Guava is very useful.

----

Shading is certainly an option.

----
I was wondering how much of Guava code we could strip by limiting to just
the classes we use directly/transitively.
With a minimal compilation (minimizeJar [1]) results are not convincing:

1437 classes (original guava) -> 919 (minimized guava - limited to only
what we use / use transitively)

Here is a configuration: https://gist.github.com/lfryc/b86d64c2a20843db0ec2

But no one says we do even need to use it minimizeJar. ;-)





[1]
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin/shade-mojo.html#minimizeJar


On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Brian Leathem <bleathem at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed 12 Feb 2014 12:39:46 PM PST, Lukáš Fryč wrote:
> >
> > It would be nice to remove one more dependency.
>
> +1.  I don't like the idea of dropping it altogether though.  Many of
> the abstractions it introduces are quite useful and lead to cleaner code.
>
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Cody Lerum
> > <richfaces-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:richfaces-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Maybe RF shouldn't depend on Guava or at a minimum shouldn't
> > depend on anything annotated @Beta as Closables was
> > (
> http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git-history/v13.0.1/javadoc/index.html
> )
>
> +1 for sticking to the stable API.
>
> We could re-explore the idea of shading guava into the richfaces jar
> under a different package name.  The downside here is it would be easy
> to forget about upgrading the library, however this would no longer
> effect user applications nor interact with leaky containers.
>
> Brian
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/richfaces-dev/attachments/20140212/e5898d06/attachment.html