Re: providing a spec-api bundle?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

+1, i use meecrowave-core in scope compile so didnt hit that need but I
fully understand it - had the same when was running after real portability.
I wouldnt call it meecrowave-spec-apis but that's a minor point
(meecrowave-api is not perfect too but less weird than specs and api*s* for
me, maybe just a personnal feeling)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book


2018-03-13 9:51 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg :

> Hi folks!
>
> I just did hack on a small Meecrowave sample with Sven Ruppert and got
> good feedback.
> One of his input is that the hardest part seems to be pulling together the
> various spec versions.
>
> So people seem to appreciate if we would provide a 'meecrowave-spec-apis'
> uberjar where we bundle all those together.
> That way people would just need to add the dependency to the APIs (scope
> provided) and the meecrowave impl.
> It seems way too hard for most people to get all the different spec
> dependencies right.
>
> Wdyt?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>

providing a spec-api bundle?

[Mark Struberg]

Hi folks!

I just did hack on a small Meecrowave sample with Sven Ruppert and got good 
feedback.
One of his input is that the hardest part seems to be pulling together the 
various spec versions.

So people seem to appreciate if we would provide a 'meecrowave-spec-apis' 
uberjar where we bundle all those together.
That way people would just need to add the dependency to the APIs (scope 
provided) and the meecrowave impl.
It seems way too hard for most people to get all the different spec 
dependencies right.

Wdyt?

LieGrue,
strub