Hi, the different lucene versions are indeed a problem. currently we use a separate profile in oak-run to create an oak specific artifact with lucene 4.x.
I think for now we should just add the new dependency and then think aboout splitting up the module if necessary. other opinions? Regards Marcel On 23/05/14 06:59, "Chetan Mehrotra" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Marcel Reutegger <[email protected]> >wrote: >> but the >> resulting jar file is indeed quite big. Do we really need >> all the jars we currently embed? > >Yes currently we are embedding quite a few jars. Looking at oak-run I >see it embed following major types of deps >1. JR2 jars (required for benchmark and also upgrade) >2. Lucene 3.6.x jars for JR2 >3. H2 and related DBCP jars for RDB >4. Oak jars >5. Logback/jopt etc required for standalone usage >6. Now groovy > >> Alternatively we may >> want to consider a new module. E.g. oak-console with only >> the required jar files to run the console. > >Might be better to go this way as we anyway have to start using Lucene >4.x to allow say a command to dump the Lucene directory content. Given >oak-run would be used for benchmark and upgrade it has to package Jr2 >and Lucene 3.6.x. So for pure oak related feature set we might require >a new module. > >Chetan Mehrotra
