Hi *, there is a couple of jars our war deployments could load from WF modules that are available either on a stock WF/EAP installation (apache commons.*, guava 18, ...) or that are our own (c* driver, guava 16). Technically, it would mean to mark those dependencies as provided and declare them as dependencies in jboss-deployment-structure.xml. The motivation is twofold: (1) Make clear that (if applicable) it is the container teams who is responsible for sustaining and productization of the jars.

(2) Make the wars smaller - faster to build, faster to release/upload, faster to download, faster to deploy. Can anybody see a reason why we should not follow this strategy? Thanks, Peter _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev mailing list hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev

Hi *, there is a couple of jars our war deployments could load from WF modules that are available either on a stock WF/EAP installation (apache commons.*, guava 18, ...) or that are our own (c* driver, guava 16). Technically, it would mean to mark those dependencies as provided and declare them as dependencies in jboss-deployment-structure.xml. The motivation is twofold: (1) Make clear that (if applicable) it is the container teams who is responsible for sustaining and productization of the jars. (2) Make the wars smaller - faster to build, faster to release/upload, faster to download, faster to deploy. Can anybody see a reason why we should not follow this strategy? Thanks, Peter _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev mailing list hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev

Let me share Juca's success story, just to illustrate, how drastic the downsizing can be: hawkular-accounts-1.0.17.Final.war 39.99 MB hawkular-accounts-1.0.18.Final.war 2.25 MB Thanks, Juca! -- P On 2016-02-04 14:44, Juraci Paixão Kröhling wrote: > Agree :) > > I was looking at the dependency:tree for the WARs generated inside > hawkular/hawkular, so, I can do some cleaning there (pinger, rest-api, > avail-creator). > > - Juca. > > On 04.02.2016 13:28, Peter Palaga wrote: >> Hi *, >> >> there is a couple of jars our war deployments could load from WF modules >> that are available either on a stock WF/EAP installation (apache >> commons.*, guava 18, ...) or that are our own (c* driver, guava 16). >> >> Technically, it would mean to mark those dependencies as provided and >> declare them as dependencies in jboss-deployment-structure.xml. >> >> The motivation is twofold: >> >> (1) Make clear that (if applicable) it is the container teams who is >> responsible for sustaining and productization of the jars. >> >> (2) Make the wars smaller - faster to build, faster to release/upload, >> faster to download, faster to deploy. >> >> Can anybody see a reason why we should not follow this strategy? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Peter >> _______________________________________________ >> hawkular-dev mailing list >> hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > hawkular-dev mailing list > hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev > _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev mailing list hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev

> hawkular-accounts-1.0.17.Final.war 1,5M > hawkular-accounts-1.0.18.Final.war 251K Fixed :)

- Juca. _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev mailing list hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev