Absolutely. This has been done for last spec version but no idea why jersey 1 was so broken in term of packaging. Le 24 janv. 2015 18:07, "Jonathan Fisher" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> After encountering, then prompting and callously disabling TomEE's > heartfelt warning against using the Jersey client (see here: > http://tomee.apache.org/tip-jersey-client.html), I was wondering why > *does* the > jersey-core jar include said classes? (This isn't a rhetorical question in > case anyone knows) It would more more sense to have jersey-core have a > Provided dependency and not mix Spec classes with implementation classes. > > It seems like maybe we could maven shade a jar, or ever strip the Spec > classes out of the jersey-core jar and let them load off the system > classpath. Has this been looked into? I could probably see what I can do > if the TomEE devs think it's a worthwhile pursuit. > > Any insight appreciated :) > > *Jonathan Fisher* > *VP - Information Technology* > *Spring Venture Group* > > -- > Email Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this > transmission is confidential, proprietary or privileged and may be subject > to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and > Accountability Act (HIPAA). The message is intended for the sole use of the > individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > recipient, you are notified that any use, distribution or copying of the > message is strictly prohibited and may subject you to criminal or civil > penalties. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the > sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the material from > any computer. >
