Re: [seam-dev] Removing the combined jar
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 18:08, John D. Ament <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com> wrote:
-1
In my opinion the combined jar helps keep the number of JAR files down in
deployments.
# of jars really doesn't matter, it's the size of the war that matters (when
we are talking about sizes).
The problem with the combined JAR is that it's too easy for a developer
to inadvertently *also* add the implementation and api jars separately, and
then the application goes haywire. This is a slippery slope because of
transitive dependencies.
The other point that a colleague of mine pointed out is that by making a
combined jar, you undermine the whole effort of having an api/impl split.
And seeing how we are trying to encourage interface-based development
and separation of these concerns, it's the right thing to do.
I'll also add that scanning behaves differently when you have a combined jar
vs individuals. So you are introducing subtle differences that could lead to
bugs.
-Dan
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 00:12, Jason Porter <lightguard.jp(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 17:32, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We discussed this briefly on IRC, however I thought we should discuss it
>>> on seam-dev before we make any concrete decision. To summarise the
>>> plan:
>>>
>>> 1. Remove the combined jar file from each of the modules
>>> 2. If the module has a single implementation, rename it to whatever the
>>> combined jar was called.
>>> E.g. for Seam Catch, the impl module would be called seam-catch.
>>> 3. If the module has multiple implementations, then add a suffix to the
>>> artifact name that reflects the individual implementation.
>>> E.g. Seam Reports has two implementations, which would be called
>>> seam-reports-jasper (for Jasper reports) and seam-reports-pentaho (for
>>> Pentaho).
>>> 4. Leave the API naming as it is, e.g. seam-reports-api.
>>>
>>> The idea is that by importing the simplified module artifact name (i.e.
>>> "seam-xxx") you would get the default implementation, which in
turn
>>> depends on the API. The advantage of this is that we won't break
>>> backwards compatibility - e.g. someone currently declaring a dependency
>>> on "seam-catch" in their pom file won't have their app broken
when we
>>> rename the modules. Also we remove the complexity introduced by having
>>> a combined jar in the first place.
>>>
>>> If you can spot any issues with this, please speak up now ;)
>>>
>>> Shane
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> seam-dev mailing list
>>> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jason Porter
>> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
>> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>>
>> Software Engineer
>> Open Source Advocate
>> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>>
>> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
>> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> seam-dev mailing list
>> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dan Allen
> Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
> Registered Linux User #231597
>
> http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
>
--
Dan Allen
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 6.4 KB)