+1 definitely That said, I could imagine a future solrconfig.xml improvement in which the desired Solr packages (modules?) are declared... and if so then using the "lib" XML element seems congruent with that. But it wouldn't be to individual JAR files! I don't love that packages are linked to collections external to the configSet since the configSet references plugins in those packages.
~ David On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 3:51 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to removing <lib> directives! > > On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 at 01:06, Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hey everyone, > > > > I want to start a discussion about deprecating and eventually removing > the > > <lib> functionality in solrconfig.xml. > > > > There are a number of ways to install custom code for Solr, all > documented > > here: > > > > > https://solr.apache.org/guide/solr/latest/configuration-guide/solr-plugins.html > > > > Letting users define "arbitrary" places to load code from at run-time is > > pretty problematic, and where a lot of our security issues come from. > Given > > the numerous ways we give users to load custom code when starting Solr, > do > > we need to keep these <lib> options around? > > > > - Houston > > >
