On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: Hey, The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no perfect solution here. Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across all those modules. If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache stores modules. I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would vote for moving that way. Thanks, Sebastian [1] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: Hi all, Re: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. Any more details behind this decision? Cheers, -- Galder Zamarreño Infinispan, Red Hat -- SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC INFINISPAN DEVELOPER Red Hat EMEA

Moreover: * The experience of Maven users should never be penalised by uber jars. Uber jar users should be a minority compared with Maven/Gradle...etc users that have dependency engines in place to select which components they want to depend on. Cheers, -- Galder Zamarreño Infinispan, Red Hat > On 7 Jun 2017, at 12:02, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > As far as I see it: > > * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. > > * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is not just theory, I've personally had such issues. > > * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. > > Cheers, > > p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? > -- > Galder Zamarreño > Infinispan, Red Hat > >> On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >> The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >> >> Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no perfect solution here. >> >> Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >> >> So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across all those modules. >> >> If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache stores modules. >> >> I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would vote for moving that way. >> >> Thanks, >> Sebastian >> >> [1] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >> [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >> [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Re: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >> >> Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >> >> Any more details behind this decision? >> >> Cheers, >> -- >> Galder Zamarreño >> Infinispan, Red Hat >> >> -- >> SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >> INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >> Red Hat EMEA >> > --

What has changed is that Stéphane has made a very good point which I had not realised: Making core provided dependency means a JCache dependency user needs to add core dependency on top of that, which reduces usability. Core jar is not a provided dependency of JCache, it's a normal dependency. I don't think provided dependencies should be used to get around uber jar dependency issues. IMO, the bigger usability issue is the fact that uber jars are available as Maven dependencies. Uber jars should just not be distributed as Maven dependencies. They should just be put somewhere else but not in Maven. That'd way we'd avoid the problem in the first place. In the mean time, I think we should: * Move back to having normal dependencies for core in JCache (and Spring too, if it applies) * Go through our examples and avoid using uber jar dependencies. Then, explore the idea above of not having uber jars as Maven dependencies. Cheers, -- Galder Zamarreño Infinispan, Red Hat > On 7 Jun 2017, at 12:23, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > We discussed it number of times, including (but probably not limited to): > • http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/2016-February/016414.html > • http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/2016-March/016490.html > You might also want to look into the internal lists... > > The biggest question - has anything changed? Do we have any other idea? > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:05 PM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Moreover: > > * The experience of Maven users should never be penalised by uber jars. Uber jar users should be a minority compared with Maven/Gradle...etc users that have dependency engines in place to select which components they want to depend on. > > Cheers, > -- > Galder Zamarreño > Infinispan, Red Hat > >> On 7 Jun 2017, at 12:02, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> As far as I see it: >> >> * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. >> >> * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is not just theory, I've personally had such issues. >> >> * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. >> >> Cheers, >> >> p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? >> -- >> Galder Zamarreño >> Infinispan, Red Hat >> >>> On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> Hey, >>> >>> The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >>> >>> Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no perfect solution here. >>> >>> Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >>> >>> So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across all those modules. >>> >>> If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache stores modules. >>> >>> I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would vote for moving that way. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Sebastian >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >>> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >>> [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >>> [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Re: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >>> >>> Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >>> >>> Any more details behind this decision? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -- >>> Galder Zamarreño >>> Infinispan, Red Hat >>> >>> -- >>> SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >>> INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >>> Red Hat EMEA >>> >> > > -- > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER > Red Hat EMEA > _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

On 7 June 2017 at 16:48, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > What has changed is that Stéphane has made a very good point which I had not realised: > > Making core provided dependency means a JCache dependency user needs to add core dependency on top of that, which reduces usability. Core jar is not a provided dependency of JCache, it's a normal dependency. I don't think provided dependencies should be used to get around uber jar dependency issues. > > IMO, the bigger usability issue is the fact that uber jars are available as Maven dependencies. Uber jars should just not be distributed as Maven dependencies. They should just be put somewhere else but not in Maven. That'd way we'd avoid the problem in the first place. > > In the mean time, I think we should: > > * Move back to having normal dependencies for core in JCache (and Spring too, if it applies) +1 > * Go through our examples and avoid using uber jar dependencies. +10 > Then, explore the idea above of not having uber jars as Maven dependencies. +100 They are designed for developers on outdated platforms. Let's ship them exclusively on floppy disks?

> > Cheers, > -- > Galder Zamarreño > Infinispan, Red Hat > >> On 7 Jun 2017, at 12:23, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> We discussed it number of times, including (but probably not limited to): >> • http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/2016- February/016414.html >> • http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/2016- March/016490.html >> You might also want to look into the internal lists... >> >> The biggest question - has anything changed? Do we have any other idea? >> >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:05 PM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> Moreover: >> >> * The experience of Maven users should never be penalised by uber jars. Uber jar users should be a minority compared with Maven/Gradle...etc users that have dependency engines in place to select which components they want to depend on. >> >> Cheers, >> -- >> Galder Zamarreño >> Infinispan, Red Hat >> >> > On 7 Jun 2017, at 12:02, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> > >> > As far as I see it: >> > >> > * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. >> > >> > * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is not just theory, I've personally had such issues. >> > >> > * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? >> > -- >> > Galder Zamarreño >> > Infinispan, Red Hat >> > >> >> On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> >> >> Hey, >> >> >> >> The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >> >> >> >> Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no perfect solution here. >> >> >> >> Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >> >> >> >> So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across all those modules. >> >> >> >> If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache stores modules. >> >> >> >> I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would vote for moving that way. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Sebastian >> >> >> >> [1] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/ 720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77b75509342007739 >> >> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >> >> [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >> >> [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> Re: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/ 9417#discussion_r120375579 >> >> >> >> Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >> >> >> >> Any more details behind this decision? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> -- >> >> Galder Zamarreño >> >> Infinispan, Red Hat >> >> >> >> -- >> >> SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >> >> INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >> >> Red Hat EMEA >> >> >> > >> >> -- >> SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >> INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >> Red Hat EMEA >> > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

As far as I see it: * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is not just theory, I've personally had such issues. * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. Cheers, p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before?

-- Galder Zamarreño Infinispan, Red Hat > On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > Hey, > > The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. > > Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no perfect solution here. > > Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. > > So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across all those modules. > > If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache stores modules. > > I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would vote for moving that way. > > Thanks, > Sebastian > > [1] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/ 720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77b75509342007739 > [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 > [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 > [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files > > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi all, > > Re: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/ 9417#discussion_r120375579 > > Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. > > Any more details behind this decision? > > Cheers, > -- > Galder Zamarreño > Infinispan, Red Hat > > -- > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER > Red Hat EMEA > _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

From: "Tristan Tarrant" <ttarrant(a)redhat.com&gt; To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 4:05:08 AM Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided dependency I think we should turn off maven deployment for uber jars. Tristan On 6/7/17 5:10 PM, Gustavo Fernandes wrote: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com > <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: > > As far as I see it: > > * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. > > * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because > all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do > goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is > not just theory, I've personally had such issues. > > * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that > don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. > > Cheers, > > p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? > > > > I totally agree. In addition, uberjars should not be an osgi bundle or a > jboss module, for similar reasons. > > P.S: Even Ant has a dependency mgmt available, which is Ivy. > > Cheers, > Gustavo > > -- > Galder Zamarreño > Infinispan, Red Hat > > > On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com > <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > Hey, > > > > The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this > JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. > > > > Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together > infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way > that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is > scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a > relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. > That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it > will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. > And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his > own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no > perfect solution here. > > > > Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few > things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. > > > > So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting > jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the > answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user > always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without > uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as > well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across > all those modules. > > > > If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is > already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss > Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here > [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to > jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, > this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + > jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache > stores modules. > > > > I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would > vote for moving that way. > > > > Thanks, > > Sebastian > > > > [1] > https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... > <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... > > [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295> > > [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132> > > [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files > <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files> > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño > <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Re: > https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... > <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... > > > > Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided > dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on > jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. > > > > Any more details behind this decision? > > > > Cheers, > > -- > > Galder Zamarreño > > Infinispan, Red Hat > > > > -- > > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC > > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER > > Red Hat EMEA > > > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > -- Tristan Tarrant Infinispan Lead JBoss, a division of Red Hat _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

I agree with Alan here. Maven Central is a free "download area", so I wouldn't give it up for free. BTW, what is the point of creating and not shipping them? I would lean towards to removing them completely or limiting the number of use cases to the minimum e.g. we shouldn't support using infinispan-embedded and jcache; if jcache is essential it should be inside infinispan-embedded; the same for Spring integration modules - either we should put them in uber jars or say that you can use Spring integration with small jars. On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:05 AM Alan Field <afield(a)redhat.com <mailto:afield@redhat.com>> wrote: Wasn't the ability to add a single dependency to a project to start using Infinispan the whole purpose for the uber jars? I'm not trying to make an argument for keeping them, because I know they have caused many issues. I just think that if we are going to remove them from Maven, then there should be a way to achieve the same easy developer on boarding that uber jars were supposed to provide. Whether this is Maven project templates, or something else doesn't matter. Thanks, Alan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tristan Tarrant" <ttarrant(a)redhat.com <mailto:ttarrant@redhat.com>> > To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> > Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 4:05:08 AM > Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided dependency > > I think we should turn off maven deployment for uber jars. > > Tristan > > On 6/7/17 5:10 PM, Gustavo Fernandes wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com> > > <mailto:galder@redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>>> wrote: > > > > As far as I see it: > > > > * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. > > > > * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because > > all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do > > goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is > > not just theory, I've personally had such issues. > > > > * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that > > don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. > > > > Cheers, > > > > p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? > > > > > > > > I totally agree. In addition, uberjars should not be an osgi bundle or a > > jboss module, for similar reasons. > > > > P.S: Even Ant has a dependency mgmt available, which is Ivy. > > > > Cheers, > > Gustavo > > > > -- > > Galder Zamarreño > > Infinispan, Red Hat > > > > > On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com> > > <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com>>> wrote: > > > > > > Hey, > > > > > > The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this > > JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. > > > > > > Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together > > infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way > > that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is > > scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a > > relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. > > That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it > > will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. > > And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his > > own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no > > perfect solution here. > > > > > > Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few > > things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. > > > > > > So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting > > jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the > > answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user > > always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without > > uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as > > well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across > > all those modules. > > > > > > If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is > > already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss > > Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here > > [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to > > jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, > > this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + > > jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache > > stores modules. > > > > > > I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would > > vote for moving that way. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Sebastian > > > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... > > <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... > > > [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 > > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295> > > > [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 > > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132> > > > [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files > > <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño > > <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com> <mailto:galder@redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>>> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Re: > > https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... > > <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... > > > > > > Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided > > dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on > > jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. > > > > > > Any more details behind this decision? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > -- > > > Galder Zamarreño > > > Infinispan, Red Hat > > > > > > -- > > > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC > > > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER > > > Red Hat EMEA > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > infinispan-dev mailing list > > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org>> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > infinispan-dev mailing list > > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > > > -- > Tristan Tarrant > Infinispan Lead > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- SEBASTIANŁASKAWIEC INFINISPAN DEVELOPER Red HatEMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> <https://red.ht/sig> _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Wasn't the ability to add a single dependency to a project to start using Infinispan the whole purpose for the uber jars? I'm not trying to make an argument for keeping them, because I know they have caused many issues. I just think that if we are going to remove them from Maven, then there should be a way to achieve the same easy developer on boarding that uber jars were supposed to provide. Whether this is Maven project templates, or something else doesn't matter. Thanks, Alan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tristan Tarrant" <ttarrant(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 4:05:08 AM > Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided dependency > > I think we should turn off maven deployment for uber jars. > > Tristan > > On 6/7/17 5:10 PM, Gustavo Fernandes wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com >> <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> As far as I see it: >> >> * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. >> >> * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because >> all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do >> goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is >> not just theory, I've personally had such issues. >> >> * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that >> don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. >> >> Cheers, >> >> p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? >> >> >> >> I totally agree. In addition, uberjars should not be an osgi bundle or a >> jboss module, for similar reasons. >> >> P.S: Even Ant has a dependency mgmt available, which is Ivy. >> >> Cheers, >> Gustavo >> >> -- >> Galder Zamarreño >> Infinispan, Red Hat >> >> > On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com >> <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com>> wrote: >> > >> > Hey, >> > >> > The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this >> JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >> > >> > Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together >> infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way >> that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is >> scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a >> relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. >> That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it >> will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. >> And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his >> own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no >> perfect solution here. >> > >> > Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few >> things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >> > >> > So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting >> jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the >> answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user >> always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without >> uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as >> well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across >> all those modules. >> > >> > If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is >> already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss >> Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here >> [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to >> jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, >> this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + >> jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache >> stores modules. >> > >> > I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would >> vote for moving that way. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Sebastian >> > >> > [1] >> https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >> > [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295> >> > [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132> >> > [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files> >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño >> <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Re: >> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >> <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >> > >> > Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided >> dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on >> jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >> > >> > Any more details behind this decision? >> > >> > Cheers, >> > -- >> > Galder Zamarreño >> > Infinispan, Red Hat >> > >> > -- >> > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >> > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >> > Red Hat EMEA >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >> <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >> > -- > Tristan Tarrant > Infinispan Lead > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

From: "Radim Vansa" <rvansa(a)redhat.com&gt; To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Friday, June 9, 2017 3:29:44 AM Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided dependency Katia has recently pointed out some usability flaws, and we have discussed a central point class that would allow you to explore the API: instead of *knowing* about org.infinispan.query.Search or org.infinispan.counters. EmbeddedCounterManagerFactory you'd just call Infinispan ispn = Infinispan.newInstance(); ispn.search().someQueryMethod(...); ispn.counters().someCounterMethod(...); ispn.cacheManager().getCache(...); An umbrella module that would contain this 'discovery API' would need all the dependencies, so that would be a perfect replacement for the embedded maven artifact. Shouldn't be that much of a work to hack this together - how do you think that should be called? infinispan-api (but it would be nicer to reserve this if we ever manage to create the 'public API' module, with interfaces only), infinispan-facade, infinispan-surface? We could even use infinispan-embedded, but that would cause some confusion if we distributed infinispan-embedded uberjar and infinispan-embedded umbrella artifact. Radim On 06/08/2017 08:04 PM, Alan Field wrote: > Wasn't the ability to add a single dependency to a project to start using > Infinispan the whole purpose for the uber jars? I'm not trying to make an > argument for keeping them, because I know they have caused many issues. I > just think that if we are going to remove them from Maven, then there > should be a way to achieve the same easy developer on boarding that uber > jars were supposed to provide. Whether this is Maven project templates, or > something else doesn't matter. > > Thanks, > Alan > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Tristan Tarrant" <ttarrant(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 4:05:08 AM >> Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided >> dependency >> >> I think we should turn off maven deployment for uber jars. >> >> Tristan >> >> On 6/7/17 5:10 PM, Gustavo Fernandes wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com >>> <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >>> >>> As far as I see it: >>> >>> * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven >>> project. >>> >>> * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because >>> all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do >>> goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is >>> not just theory, I've personally had such issues. >>> >>> * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that >>> don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? >>> >>> >>> >>> I totally agree. In addition, uberjars should not be an osgi bundle or a >>> jboss module, for similar reasons. >>> >>> P.S: Even Ant has a dependency mgmt available, which is Ivy. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Gustavo >>> >>> -- >>> Galder Zamarreño >>> Infinispan, Red Hat >>> >>> > On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com >>> <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hey, >>> > >>> > The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this >>> JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >>> > >>> > Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together >>> infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way >>> that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is >>> scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a >>> relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. >>> That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it >>> will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. >>> And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his >>> own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no >>> perfect solution here. >>> > >>> > Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few >>> things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >>> > >>> > So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting >>> jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the >>> answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user >>> always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without >>> uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as >>> well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across >>> all those modules. >>> > >>> > If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is >>> already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss >>> Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here >>> [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to >>> jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, >>> this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + >>> jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache >>> stores modules. >>> > >>> > I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would >>> vote for moving that way. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Sebastian >>> > >>> > [1] >>> https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >>> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >>> > [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >>> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295> >>> > [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >>> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132> >>> > [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >>> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files> >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño >>> <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > Re: >>> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >>> <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >>> > >>> > Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided >>> dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on >>> jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >>> > >>> > Any more details behind this decision? >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > -- >>> > Galder Zamarreño >>> > Infinispan, Red Hat >>> > >>> > -- >>> > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >>> > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >>> > Red Hat EMEA >>> > >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>> <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>> >> -- >> Tristan Tarrant >> Infinispan Lead >> JBoss, a division of Red Hat >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com&gt; JBoss Performance Team _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

On 11 Jun 2017, at 20:35, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: On 9 June 2017 at 16:13, Alan Field <afield(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I really like this idea. It is similar to one of the solutions hinted at in the Netty issue that Gustavo pointed at. [1] The suggestion there was to replace their current uber jar that contains all of the shaded dependencies with a JAR that just depended on everything. Then you would get the benefit of being able to use a single Maven dependency to pull in all of the JAR files without the issues that shading brings. The proposal is to bundle APIs only, but we'll always have tons of optional (and provided) extension points, e.g. we can't include all CacheStore(s), not least as many live in separate repositories. Similarly, many "experimental modules" might provide additional APIs which will need to be accessed like the current Query API: *decoupled* - at least until there's an agreement for inclusion in such an umbrella API. This is unavoidable as someone might start working on such a module without telling us.. incidentally to foster a community of extensions I'd rather have our own API showcase how it works. Also some Java EE APIs - e.g. the JTA API - should never be included; that's "best practice" in community standards - ugly and we could complain that Maven could deal better with it, containers could also deal better with it, but that's how it is. So it's an improvement in the API but it's not sorting out the problems for people not familiar with dependency management. And I believe that's ok! Just making sure we're agreeing on the goals and non-goals. Considering it's a very minor improvement in usability I'm not sold about this direction: you'll have ONE MORE JAR and one more layer of silly indirection to maintain. You might state it's trivial but I don't believe that, as the definition of which components to include is necessarily going to be fuild, makign this "API" more prone to wild changes. The one liner to get a reference to the SearchFactory is no big deal and could be solved better by having CDI and Spring extensions - while maintaining good decoupling - but if it's the path to convince you all to take out the uber jars then by all means do it right now ;) Thanks, Sanne > > Thanks, > Alan > > [1] https://github.com/netty/netty/issues/4671 > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Radim Vansa" <rvansa(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> Sent: Friday, June 9, 2017 3:29:44 AM >> Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided dependency >> >> Katia has recently pointed out some usability flaws, and we have >> discussed a central point class that would allow you to explore the API: >> instead of *knowing* about org.infinispan.query.Search or >> org.infinispan.counters. EmbeddedCounterManagerFactory you'd just call >> >> Infinispan ispn = Infinispan.newInstance(); >> ispn.search().someQueryMethod(...); >> ispn.counters().someCounterMethod(...); >> ispn.cacheManager().getCache(...); >> >> An umbrella module that would contain this 'discovery API' would need >> all the dependencies, so that would be a perfect replacement for the >> embedded maven artifact. Shouldn't be that much of a work to hack this >> together - how do you think that should be called? infinispan-api (but >> it would be nicer to reserve this if we ever manage to create the >> 'public API' module, with interfaces only), infinispan-facade, >> infinispan-surface? We could even use infinispan-embedded, but that >> would cause some confusion if we distributed infinispan-embedded uberjar >> and infinispan-embedded umbrella artifact. >> >> Radim >> >> On 06/08/2017 08:04 PM, Alan Field wrote: >>> Wasn't the ability to add a single dependency to a project to start using >>> Infinispan the whole purpose for the uber jars? I'm not trying to make an >>> argument for keeping them, because I know they have caused many issues. I >>> just think that if we are going to remove them from Maven, then there >>> should be a way to achieve the same easy developer on boarding that uber >>> jars were supposed to provide. Whether this is Maven project templates, or >>> something else doesn't matter. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Alan >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Tristan Tarrant" <ttarrant(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 4:05:08 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided >>>> dependency >>>> >>>> I think we should turn off maven deployment for uber jars. >>>> >>>> Tristan >>>> >>>> On 6/7/17 5:10 PM, Gustavo Fernandes wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com >>>>> <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> As far as I see it: >>>>> >>>>> * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven >>>>> project. >>>>> >>>>> * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because >>>>> all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do >>>>> goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is >>>>> not just theory, I've personally had such issues. >>>>> >>>>> * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that >>>>> don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I totally agree. In addition, uberjars should not be an osgi bundle or a >>>>> jboss module, for similar reasons. >>>>> >>>>> P.S: Even Ant has a dependency mgmt available, which is Ivy. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Gustavo >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Galder Zamarreño >>>>> Infinispan, Red Hat >>>>> >>>>>> On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com >>>>> <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hey, >>>>>> >>>>>> The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this >>>>> JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >>>>>> >>>>>> Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together >>>>> infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way >>>>> that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is >>>>> scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a >>>>> relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. >>>>> That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it >>>>> will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. >>>>> And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his >>>>> own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no >>>>> perfect solution here. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few >>>>> things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >>>>>> >>>>>> So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting >>>>> jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the >>>>> answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user >>>>> always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without >>>>> uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as >>>>> well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across >>>>> all those modules. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is >>>>> already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss >>>>> Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here >>>>> [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to >>>>> jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, >>>>> this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + >>>>> jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache >>>>> stores modules. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would >>>>> vote for moving that way. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>> https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >>>>> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >>>>>> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >>>>> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295> >>>>>> [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >>>>> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132> >>>>>> [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >>>>> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño >>>>> <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Re: >>>>> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >>>>> <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >>>>>> >>>>>> Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided >>>>> dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on >>>>> jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any more details behind this decision? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Galder Zamarreño >>>>>> Infinispan, Red Hat >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >>>>>> INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >>>>>> Red Hat EMEA >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>>>> <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tristan Tarrant >>>> Infinispan Lead >>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>> _______________________________________________ >>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >> >> >> -- >> Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com&gt; >> JBoss Performance Team >> >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Wasn't the ability to add a single dependency to a project to start using Infinispan the whole purpose for the uber jars? I'm not trying to make an argument for keeping them, because I know they have caused many issues. I just think that if we are going to remove them from Maven, then there should be a way to achieve the same easy developer on boarding that uber jars were supposed to provide. Whether this is Maven project templates, or something else doesn't matter. Thanks, Alan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tristan Tarrant" <ttarrant(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 4:05:08 AM > Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Why JCache embedded has core as provided dependency > > I think we should turn off maven deployment for uber jars. > > Tristan > > On 6/7/17 5:10 PM, Gustavo Fernandes wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com >> <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> As far as I see it: >> >> * infinispan-embedded should never be a dependency in a Maven project. >> >> * No uber jars should really be used as Maven dependencies because >> all the exclusion that fine grained dependencies allow you to do >> goes out of the window when all classes are inside a jar. This is >> not just theory, I've personally had such issues. >> >> * Uber jars are designed for Ant or other build tool users that >> don't have a dependency resolution engine in place. >> >> Cheers, >> >> p.s. I thought we had already discussed this before? >> >> >> >> I totally agree. In addition, uberjars should not be an osgi bundle or a >> jboss module, for similar reasons. >> >> P.S: Even Ant has a dependency mgmt available, which is Ivy. >> >> Cheers, >> Gustavo >> >> -- >> Galder Zamarreño >> Infinispan, Red Hat >> >> > On 7 Jun 2017, at 11:50, Sebastian Laskawiec <slaskawi(a)redhat.com >> <mailto:slaskawi@redhat.com>> wrote: >> > >> > Hey, >> > >> > The change was introduced by this commit [1] and relates to this >> JIRAs [2][3]. The root cause is in [3]. >> > >> > Imagine a scenario where you add JCache module to your together >> infinispan-embedded. If your classpath was constructed in such a way >> that infinispan-embedded was before infinispan-core (classpath is >> scanned from left to right in standalone apps), we could get a >> relocated (uber jars move some classes into other packages) logger. >> That caused class mismatch errors. It is worth to mention that it >> will happen to all relocated classes, logger was just an example. >> And we need to relocate them, since a user might want to use his >> own, newer version of DMR or any other library. So there's no >> perfect solution here. >> > >> > Now a lot of time passed since then and we changed quite a few >> things. So this topic probably needs to be revisited. >> > >> > So the first question that we should ask, shall we allow putting >> jcache and infinispan-embedded together on the classpath. If the >> answer is yes, I believe it should stay as it is (since the user >> always have a choice whether he wants to use jcache with or without >> uber jar). The same question needs to be asked for Spring modules as >> well as all cache stores. The behavior needs to be consistent across >> all those modules. >> > >> > If the answer is no (which is also valid because jcache is >> already present in embedded uber jar), we should migrate all JBoss >> Logging references to Infinispan Common Logging (as Tristan did here >> [4]) and we can make infinispan-core as a compile time dependency to >> jcache. Even though migrating to Infinispan logger is not necessary, >> this way we won't break users app which used infinispan-embedded + >> jcache approach. Of course the same applies to Spring and Cache >> stores modules. >> > >> > I think the latter approach deserves some exploration. I would >> vote for moving that way. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Sebastian >> > >> > [1] >> https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/commit/720f158cce38d86b292e1ce77... >> > [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295 >> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6295> >> > [3] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132 >> <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-6132> >> > [4] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files >> <https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/4140/files> >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:19 AM Galder Zamarreño >> <galder(a)redhat.com <mailto:galder@redhat.com>> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Re: >> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >> <https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/pull/9417#discussion_r1203... >> > >> > Stéphane makes a good point there, why did we make core provided >> dependency? It does feel a bit of a pain that anyone that depends on >> jcache embedded also needs to depend on core. >> > >> > Any more details behind this decision? >> > >> > Cheers, >> > -- >> > Galder Zamarreño >> > Infinispan, Red Hat >> > >> > -- >> > SEBASTIAN ŁASKAWIEC >> > INFINISPAN DEVELOPER >> > Red Hat EMEA >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >> <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >> > > -- > Tristan Tarrant > Infinispan Lead > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev