On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Dec 4, 2012, at 8:09 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 12/04/2012 01:10 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: > >> Hi devs, > >> > >> I'd like to propose that we stop shading Rendering Standalone. The > reasons are: > >> > >> 1) It's far from perfect. For example we have at least 3 libs we cannot > shade: > >> > >> <!-- We don't relocate the following packages since they > cause runtime issues: > >> - javax.xml > >> - org.w3c > >> - org.apache.xerces > >> --> > >> > >> > >> 2) As we added some libs to our deps we forgot to relocate them so > right now we don't shade (to cite a few): com.steadystate.css, > javax.validation, ant, aspectj, slf4j, etc > >> 3) There are lots of resources coming from dependent jars and those are > not shaded. For example: > >> > >> 283 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 javacc.class > >> 286 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 jjdoc.class > >> 235 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 jjtree.class > >> 0 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 org/xwiki/shaded/javacc/ > >> > >> or > >> > >> 3783 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 > org/xwiki/shaded/javacc/utils/JavaFileGenerator.class > >> 3693 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/CharStream.template > >> 15990 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/JavaCharStream.template > >> 867 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/MultiNode.template > >> 1317 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/Node.template > >> 5962 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/ParseException.template > >> 12711 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/SimpleCharStream.template > >> 3227 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/SimpleNode.template > >> 4005 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/Token.template > >> 368 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/TokenManager.template > >> 4244 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 templates/TokenMgrError.template > >> 48 Tue Dec 04 18:50:42 CET 2012 version.properties > >> > >> So I'd like to keep a standalone distribution to make it easy to test > XWiki Rendering but without any shading. > >> > >> Here's my +1 > >> > > > > +0. > > > > I believe that it will be a good idea to shade a few critical libraries > > that are likely to appear in incompatible version, and which are known > > to cause problems otherwise and which work fine when shaded. I did a > > quick check on dependency:tree and there doesn't seem to be any such > > library, but we've had such problems with rhino and asm in the > > xwiki-platform, and even log4j when the container prefers to use its own > > version. > > The most problematic libraries AFAIK are the ones we exclude because they > can't be shaded :) > > The problem is that right now we document this as if it was a working > solution when it definitely isn't and I don't think it's good that we do > so. Providing just a bundle to quickly get started if you don't have maven > and making sure to mention the JAR hell issue and how to fix it if you want > to include it in your project is the best solution I can think of. > > Actually what we could do to make sure there's no misunderstanding is just > to provide a zip will all JARs and leave it to the user to use them in his > project. > +1 for the zip > > Thanks > -Vincent > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
