I prefer option #1
Quoting David Karlsen <[email protected]>:
I preget #1 which gives full control.
Den 19. aug. 2011 20:01 skrev "Daniel Kulp" <[email protected]> følgende:
I just wanted to get users opinions on:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-3741
Basically, right now, we ship just the 6 individual jetty jars that we
need
for the various CXF features (and we likely should ship the jetty mgmt jar
as
well to make 7). These 6 jars are defined as deps in the appropriate pom
so
maven grabs them, etc...
The proposal is to use and ship the jetty-all jar instead so all the Jetty
features are available to use. It reduces the jar count, but increases the
size a little bit.
There are 3 options:
1) Leave things as is.
2) Only use jetty-all
3) Leave things as is in the pom so maven users are unaffected, but ship
the
jetty-all in the distribution/lib dir.
I'm leaning toward #2 for CXF 2.5. Simple reason is that if someone wants
to
use the individual jars, they can exclude a single jar and add the others
as a
dep for their app. With #1, if they want jetty-all, they have to exclude a
bunch of deps to add jetty-all in. I'm personally not a fan of #3, but
thought I'd list it. :-)
Thoughts?
--
Daniel Kulp
[email protected]
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--------
"I don't care what you can do. I care what you can guarantee."
