[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17202?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17828276#comment-17828276
]
Jan Høydahl commented on SOLR-17202:
------------------------------------
I updated the description.
The original reason for changing groupID was to avoid name-clash of
{{solrj-core}} and {{solr-core}} artifacts in gradle.
Of course, there would be no clash if we continue using
{{org.apache.solr:solr-solrj}} as the new "slim" artifact in 10.0. But we were
reluctant to "redefining" the meaning of the now-fat maven coordinate to
becoming a super-slim artifact instead. It is likely a better developer
experience to be forced to change coordinates to find solrj v10, and then read
the release notes, rather than just bumping the version, getting tons of
ClassNotFoundException and having to guess what happened.
Do we feel that the rationale for introducing new groupID still holds?
> Change SolrJ maven coordinates (10.x)
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-17202
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17202
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: SolrJ
> Reporter: Jan Høydahl
> Priority: Major
>
> Today SolrJ uses the same groupID as Solr itself, {{{}org.apache.solr{}}}.
> In SOLR-16078 [~houston] mentioned that we might need to change groupID for
> SolrJ if we wanted to have a new solrj-core artifact, since Gradle would
> conflate solr-core and solrj-core. Thus in that issue it was
> discussed/concluded to move solrj to {{{}org.apache.solr.solrj{}}}.
> This JIRA is dedicated to that task.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
