flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Changing Flink's shading model
Date Thu, 11 May 2017 18:32:06 GMT
@eron I would try to rely almost purely on the shade plugin


On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Eron Wright <eronwright@gmail.com> wrote:

> In my opinion, the ideal approach to mitigating conflicts between
> application code and Flink itself is to relocate all of Flink's
> dependencies.  Rationale is to avoid placing the burden of relocation on
> the app developer, and ultimately to eliminate the need for an app
> uber-jar.
>
> For example, imagine enhancing Flink to directly support Maven
> repositories, e.g.
> ```
> $ flink run --package org.example:app:1.0
> ...
> Downloading: https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/example/app/1.0/app.pom
> ...
> ```
>
> From that perspective, FLINK-6529 is another good step in that direction.
> But it seems like we'd be forking more libraries ("fetty"!).   Would we
> need to alter the source code or rely on the shading plugin?  As Chesnay
> mentioned, what's the impact in the IDE?
>
> In the future, could the entire flink-runtime be made an uber-jar,
> performing the relocation at that stage?
>
>
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Till Rohrmann <trohrmann@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Have we somewhere documented how to publish
> > > artifacts on Maven central?
> >
> > Pulling in Robert who published frocks. @Robert: Would you like to
> > volunteer for this? Would really help to combine this with some docs
> > about publishing Maven artefacts in the flink-shaded-deps README. :-)
> > In general, I'm curious to hear your opinion on this proposal.
> >
> > – Ufuk
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message