Hi Chris, +1 also from me.
If it works then is shade ok 😉 Greetings Matthias Strljic, M.Sc. Universität Stuttgart Institut für Steuerungstechnik der Werkzeugmaschinen und Fertigungseinrichtungen (ISW) Seidenstraße 36 70174 Stuttgart GERMANY Tel: +49 711 685-84530 Fax: +49 711 685-74530 E-Mail: matthias.strl...@isw.uni-stuttgart.de Web: http://www.isw.uni-stuttgart.de -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> Gesendet: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:57 AM An: dev@plc4x.apache.org Betreff: Switch to from assembly to shade plugin for building Uber-jars? Hi all, you know we were having problems in the past with the assembly of the no-deps artifacts. We solved this by creating a new assembly descriptor with plugins to merge the services properties. Now while working on our demo for Vegas Roman had problems with these as there seem to be other parts that also require merging. He came up with a solution to use the shade plugin. Switching to this has the advantage of not having to maintain an assembly.xml or deploy and release a dedicated assembly artifact. We could simply define the defaults in the parent and then just use the shade plugin wherever we need it. I sort of remembered that it was discouraged to use the shade plugin in preference of the assembly in the past, but I could no longer see this confirmed. So how about switching the uber-jar generator? Chris
