On 26/04/2017 09:32, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-04-26 10:28, Davide Giannella wrote: > >> a release we're not triggering any specific profile. > > Well, in that case we're not triggering the profile, right?
Exactly. Therefore the released oak-run never embedded any jdbc so far. Anyone correct me if I'm wrong. > >> Regardless, the fastest solution is to increase the size according to >> what you see. However is this a new dependency you're adding as of new >> features? > > No, it always has been the case. > > However, if you select all RDB profiles you'll include essentially all > JDBC drivers, in which case maintaining the limit becomes pretty > pointless... I'd say you could change the size for the RDB profiles only (adding the enforcer size under the profiles) or simply increase the general size. It seems strange to me that we're not embedding the jdbc dependencies for the released jar. Maybe we want to change that and simplify. How bit is the generated jar for the RDB profiles? D.
