+1

We shaded in guava for the appengine SDK, to try to get around this, which
lead to other problems...

Matt
On Oct 24, 2014 12:49 PM, "Adrian Cole" <adrian.f.c...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, team.
>
> I feel the need to reiterate something, which may not impact everyone, but
> should be taken into consideration nevertheless.
>
> jclouds is best a part of a platform. As a library, it needs to take care
> not to make that impossible. Unlike some of our dayjobs, we cannot treat
> jclouds as a monorepo or a monoculture, where we can assert a particular
> version makes sense for us, then switch immediately to it.
>
> The idea of being runtime portable is a part of our legacy and played a
> part in the large adoption jclouds had prior to entering the ASF.
>
> We've drifted from there. We moved to guava 17 in jclouds 1.8 without
> analyzing the impact on our ecosystem. Core tools like jenkins weren't
> consulted and may not work at all now. I'm willing to bet that many of the
> apps
> that use jclouds <https://jclouds.apache.org/community/users/> either
> can't
> work or were forced into a guava upgrade solely because we made them.
>
> Other platforms and potential integrations are even more difficult now.
> For example, jclouds 1.8 is now incompatible with platforms from the last 3
> companies I've worked at: Netflix, Square, and Twitter. While the ceiling
> version is 16.0.1 across the three, there are some in the 14 range, and a
> couple projects at 11!
>
> I asking, if not begging, to please not forget the legacy which in part led
> us to where we are today. Please consider greatly the impact of runtime
> portability.
>
> If guava makes jclouds impossible, jclouds is impossible. Please don't
> force guava versions without thinking it through and asking diverse users,
> or at least doing an industry poll on what is sustainable. It is really
> burdensome to backport or revert this stuff, and we all have more important
> work to do.
>
> In summary, we want to be known for making cloud easy, not making
> dependency conflicts the norm.
>
> -A
>

Reply via email to