[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-169?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13970120#comment-13970120
]
Jon logan commented on STORM-169:
---------------------------------
I don't think it's fair to simply say "this was not a wise decision" -- it's
exactly how Hadoop does it. Is it inconvenient? Sure. You can mitigate this
issue in two ways --
In the case of some dependencies, where you can update cleanly without any code
changes, you can do so in the lib/ folder of your Storm installation. Just drop
in the new dependency, and you're done.
If that is not the case, you are unable, or unwilling to recompile the source
of Storm, or that is not an option in your environment, you can for the most
part shade relocate your dependencies. Elegant? No, but it usually works.
The true solution to this problem likely involves some form of classpath
separation between Storm classes and client classes, similar how other
application containers like JBoss do it. This is no simple task, and involves
many of its own issues.
> Storm depends on outdated versions of hiccup and ring
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-169
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-169
> Project: Apache Storm (Incubating)
> Issue Type: Wish
> Reporter: James Xu
> Priority: Minor
>
> https://github.com/nathanmarz/storm/issues/707
> Storm core depends on a very old versions of
> hiccup 0.3.6 => 1.0.4
> ring-* 0.3.11 => 1.2.0
> Especially the hiccup version conflicts with modern libraries like liberator
> (see also weavejester/hiccup#86
> IllegalStateException escape-html already refers to:
> #'hiccup.core/escape-html in namespace: hiccup.page
> ----------
> revans2: I agree that storm depends on old versions of libraries that I would
> love to see updated, but simply updating the versions can cause a lot of pain
> too. Having worked through this on Hadoop the only real solution is to get to
> true dependency isolation. There are just too many libraries that are not
> backwards and forwards compatible in very subtle ways, even for minor
> releases. If you upgrade one dependency to fix a specific incompatibility it
> will break someone else with a new incompatibility.
> I am not saying that we should not do this. People should be willing to pay
> off tech debt and upgrade, but until we can isolate a user's dependencies
> from storm's dependencies we need to consider major dependency upgrades as
> incompatible changes.
> ----------
> jocrau: Yes, updating versions can cause a lot of pain. But deferring every
> update to the time when the user's dependency is isolated might also cause a
> lot of pain and slow down the adoption of Storm in some domains (like RESTful
> services). I would love to see a more differentiated approach. Hiccup for
> example is only used in the Storm UI; a place where I expect little impact.
> ----------
> revans2: I totally agree. I just wanted to be sure that the storm version
> number was bumped when we did this, so that we are indicating to downstream
> users that something incompatible may have happened and they need to retest.
> Now that storm is a multi-module project splitting out the UI and logviewer
> to be their own jars with separate dependencies really seems like a good
> start for isolation. More then that gets a little bit harry but is still
> doable.
> If you think about it the worker only needs to pull in a few clojure APIs,
> disruptor, curator, and jzmq or netty depending on how it is configured.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
