Done, Julian.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1224
Tried to coalesce the details down to the essentials. It will be very
trivial to add a new (non-shaded) 'avatica' jar. The primary work will
be the third point of creating some form of documentation for showing
users how they can use a non-shaded Avatica artifact to create their own
shaded version for their application.
Julian Hyde wrote:
Can someone please log a JIRA case for this?
I have trouble keeping up with the discussion about which combination(s) of
shaded& included libraries work for everyone. So I think in the short term the
solution will be a bug-fix-branch with a hacked POM that produces what Kevin wants.
Then we can figure out whether we can or want to include it in the POM on the
master branch, say by means of profiles, and which of those combinations we push to
Maven central when we make a release.
Julian
On May 2, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Josh Elser<[email protected]> wrote:
Kevin Risden wrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Josh Elser<[email protected]> wrote:
1) A fully-shaded avatica client jar
2) A non-shaded avatica client jar
2a) An example project which shows how you can build your own shaded
artifact for your own purposes
Yea exactly :) I think we are on the same page now. I've read that Elastic
blog post and they came to basically the same conclusions. I have no
problem building a shaded artifact myself, but that is impossible when the
artifact is already shaded.
Here is a thought on how to accomplish this without drastically changing
the avatica artifact.
1. Add a avatica-commons artifact that isn't shaded (that is the same as
the avatica artifact).
2. avatica-server to avatica-commons
3. Point avatica to avatica-commons and keep it shaded.
Sure, that'd be one way to approach it for 1.8.0 -- it shouldn't hurt anyone
from 1.7 and earlier.
We really need to solidify an API for Avatica and just defer to SemVer for
guidance in the future, but I don't think that will happen until a 2.0.0 (and
this doesn't negatively impact us in that eventuality).
Thanks for the positive discussion.
