snazy commented on PR #8065: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8065#issuecomment-1672782831
> Overall, I'm not opposed to adding a bom, but I'm not sure if this will be more helpful or confusing. Many projects that depend on iceberg (Flink/Spark/etc.) do not publish a bom and Iceberg will frequently be dropped in. If you build fat job jars, they may pull in transitive dependencies that conflict with the existing libraries. We try to match the upstream dependencies, so maybe it will generally be ok. BOMs are useful when multiple dependencies from the same project are needed - to align versions. BOMs are actually good practice IMO. "Fat/uber jars" do not need BOMs. (flame off) Fat/uber jars that contain not-relocated dependencies are a gift that keeps on giving dependency issues - having non-relocated dependencies in a fat/uber jar intended to be used with other dependencies is an absolute no-go IMHO. Fat/uber jars are a relict from the time when the only option was to manually drop a jar somewhere - even Spark has a (rudimentary) dependency resolution mechanism. Beside that, fat/uber jars containing dependencies are way too big. (flame on) -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
