You don't want runtime libraries and test time libraries in the same jar. Putting junit utility and annotation classes that would only be used in junits in a jar that would have to be included in a production class path is broken. Gemfire-common.jar would imply something common to gemfire at runtime, like string utils, logging, and other cross cutting runtime concerns.
If you want a library for common test classes then think gemfire-test-common.jar or something. Jacob Barrett Manager GemFire Advanced Customer Engineering (ACE) Pivotal [email protected] 503-533-3763 For immediate support please contact Pivotal Support at http://support.pivotal.io/ On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 7:04 AM, Anthony Baker <[email protected]> wrote: > Annotations are utilities…? The gemfire-junit name seems unnecessarily > restrictive. Currently it only contains annotations related to junit tests. > Hadoop defines both hadoop-annotations and hadoop-common. > Anthony >> On Sep 11, 2015, at 9:08 PM, Jacob Barrett <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> -1 >> >> >> >> >> Reserve common for things common to geode development not related to unit >> testing. Like utilities classes. >> >> >> >> >> Jacob Barrett >> Manager >> GemFire Advanced Customer Engineering (ACE) >> Pivotal >> >> [email protected] >> 503-533-3763 >> >> For immediate support please contact Pivotal Support at >> http://support.pivotal.io/ >> >> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Kirk Lund <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I filed ticket GEODE-327 to propose renaming gemfire-junit to >>> gemfire-common. >>> We'd like to be able to define common annotations in this gemfire-common >>> and not be limited to code that is specific to junit or testing. The first >>> annotation would be Experimental (see GEODE-328). >>> Please vote on making this change. >>> Thanks, >>> Kirk
