Is the issue here just the configuration types or is there more? For the config types, I think we can get away by having the smallrye-config annotations on the "parent" interface.
My concern is that polaris-runtime-service is rather the Quarkus specifics. CDI is great, just Quarkus isn't the only enterprise-CDI runtime. Spoiler: I do *not* think that Polaris should move away from Quarkus. But for sole testing purposes Quarkus is quite expensive, too expensive IMO to make it a necessity for all tests. Sure, not all tests have to be `@QuarkusTest`s, but I could imagine that there will be tests that do not need Quarkus are annotated as such. On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 12:19 PM Alexandre Dutra <adu...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > The polaris-service-common module is a reminiscence of the times where > we were still supporting two runtimes. > > I think it has now become obsolete, and could be merged into > polaris-runtime-service. > > One annoyance that polaris-service-common brings is with configuration > classes that have to exist in both modules (e.g. > AuthenticationConfiguration vs QuarkusAuthenticationConfiguration). > > Would we be OK with this merge? If so I'm happy to provide the PR. > > Thanks, > Alex
