Good catch. Give me some time to deal with my fresh jet lag and we will
figure it out with Gyula. :)
On Sep 29, 2014 12:50 PM, "Stephan Ewen" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Shipping the connectors with the job jars would thin out the dependencies,
> but make it more cumbersome to assemble a job jar.
>
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Gyula Fora <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks, I will look into this and try to figure it out, as you can see I
> > am not a maven pro :)
> >
> > On 29 Sep 2014, at 18:44, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > You may be able to solve this with careful exclusions.
> > >
> > > It seems kafka is monolithic, having no separation between connector
> and
> > > engine. If you know for example that zookeeper is not required by the
> > > connector (you have to be sure), you can exclude it as the dependency.
> We
> > > have done this for Hadoop1, where we only use the HDFS client
> > functionality.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Gyula Fóra <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Yes, you are right, kafka and flume are the heavy ones.
> > >>
> > >> We always have the choice to take out them from the package and maybe
> > have
> > >> a separate repo for all the different connectors and only keep 1-2
> most
> > >> important ones. I don't think there's much else to do because we don't
> > use
> > >> the packages you mentioned, but they get pulled by the kafka and flume
> > >> dependencies.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The streaming connectors currently pull a massive amount of
> > dependencies.
> > >>>
> > >>> For example, we transitively get the scala compiler/reflection/etc
> and
> > >>> ZooKeeper.
> > >>>
> > >>> A lot of stuff comes with flume and kafka. Are those required to make
> > the
> > >>> connectors work? Otherwise, it might be good to exclude them, to
> > prevent
> > >>> conflicts for users that actually depend on those components.
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to