On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Thomas Broyer <t.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:

> AFAIK, as soon as you use a <classifier> in a dependency, the transitive
> dependencies from its POM aren't used (actually, Maven might even not
> download the POM at all in this case); so you should be OK using
> <classifier>shaded</classifier>.
>

I don't think that's correct. One of the drawbacks with using classifiers
is that there is just ONE pom, which is used for all artifacts.

/Anders


> Note however that, this shaded JAR still depends on Guava, SLF4J API and
> Immutables, so you'll have to add explicit dependencies on those.
>
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 7:36 AM Sander Verhagen <san...@sanderverhagen.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi list,
> >
> >
> > Different microservices at one company often have some shared
> > infrastructure, such as for Service Discovery. I'm looking to use the
> > awesome Consul Client for Java (
> > https://github.com/OrbitzWorldwide/consul-client), and build a library
> > that our various (Maven-based Java) microservices can use. In order to
> make
> > our library not too invasive in terms of dependency resolution, I like
> the
> > idea of using Consul Client's "shaded JAR". I believe shaded JARs weren't
> > really meant to be consumed by other Maven projects. But this may be a
> > reasonable exception. But when you look at the output of such project
> (like
> > here:
> > https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/orbitz/consul/consul-client/0.16.3/),
> > you'll see a POM file with all the original dependencies, oblivious to
> the
> > shading. Is there any known pattern of dealing with that? Like: "POM
> > classifiers" - I know, I made that up. I also know there's an option to
> > generate a "dependency reduced POM", but what good does that do if I
> can't
> > depend on it? Should this project be generating two separate artifacts?
> >
> > (P.S.: I can certainly file an issue with the Consul Client project, but
> I
> > want to be more helpful than that, and offer a concrete suggestion or a
> PR.)
> >
> > Thanks, Sander.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sander Verhagen
> > [  san...@sanderverhagen.net<mailto:san...@sanderverhagen.net>  ]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to