Thanks for opening the discuss and the proposal, Micah. Looks reasonable to me.
Thanks Ji Liu ------------------------------------------------------------------ 发件人：Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> 发送时间：2019年6月26日(星期三) 20:35 收件人：dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> 主 题：Re: [Discuss][Java] Shading Flatbuffer dependency There is a proposed PR [1] now that shades flatbuffers by consolidating all related code in the vector module and provides wrapping classes upstream for flight. It deletes the format module. Feedback welcome. Thanks, Micah [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/4701 On Thursday, June 20, 2019, Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > ARROW-5579 [1] brought to our attention that the core flat buffer library > makes no guarantees of compatibility with generated class files that were > generated with a different version. > > Properly shading the dependency seems to require using the shaded version > across all of our sub-project. Ji Liu followed this approach and created > a pull request [2] that shades the dependency in the "format" module and > then uses the shaded version in downstream modules. > > This is an invasive change and has the potential to break IDE development > workflows [3] so I figured it was worth discussing on the mailing list. > > Questions: > 1. Do we want to shade the package? > 2. Is there a better way to accomplish this that would continue to allow > full IDE support? > 3. Are we ok making the development process harder for Java developers (I > wonder if eclipse or other IDEs have similar issues?) > > Thanks, > Micah > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5579 > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/4629 > [3] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-93855 >
