On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Max Andersen <manderse@redhat.com> wrote:

I was thinking Plugin jar having references to dependent jars via manifest.mf

/max (sent from my phone)

On 12/04/2011, at 00.39, "Lincoln Baxter, III" <lincolnbaxter@gmail.com> wrote:

Can you give an example of how you would bundle the JARs? (Just put them in /META-INF/dependencies/ ... ?) And would that not cause just as many class conflicts? If you shade/relocate then the deps *should be* completely isolated.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen <max.andersen@redhat.com> wrote:

well, recommending just bundling jars would be a better approach than shading IMO.

/max

On Apr 11, 2011, at 16:00, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:

> Yeah, shading is currently the recommended approach. Conflicts should be avoided by using relocations. I know this is... not a great method, but for now it's all we've got. Open to suggestions.
>
> ~Lincoln
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen <max.andersen@redhat.com> wrote:
> Heya,
>
> Lincoln, I just saw your commits to hibernattools plugin at (https://github.com/forge/plugin-hibernate-tools/commit/8b208b4a8e79dbb8a01d10d266ee81afd2cf7106)
>
> Is shading of jars really the recommended approach for plugins in Forge ?
>
> How are you going to share/avoid collisions of libraries across plugins if they need to bundle via shading ?
>
> /max
> http://about.me/maxandersen
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Baxter, III
> http://ocpsoft.com
> http://scrumshark.com
> "Keep it Simple"

/max
http://about.me/maxandersen

--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
"Keep it Simple"