jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Jackrabbit dependencies
Date Wed, 02 Feb 2011 12:43:07 GMT
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Jukka Zitting <jzitting@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> On 02/01/2011 04:35 PM, GOODWIN, MATTHEW (ATTCORP) wrote:
>> We'd like to trim down the required dependencies that are deployed
>> in our application.
> Do you have some pressing need for this (size, licensing, etc.)? If not,
> by far the easiest solution is just to leave the dependencies intact, as
> otherwise you'll need to keep reviewing your custom deployment whenever
> you do an upgrade as the dependency graph may have changed.
> In the end it's just a few megabytes of extra bits which should nowadays

sorry, but i don't agree. adding 'just a few megabytes' of extra dependencies
which the majority of the users won't need do add up in the end and
might cause conflicts in different deployment scenarios.

the recent addition of the netcdf library is IMO an excellent example.
apparently it did cause classloader issues, it increased the size of
jackrabbit by 15% and the majority of jackrabbit users will probably
never use it... [1]

just my 0.02$


[1] http://jackrabbit.510166.n4.nabble.com/unable-to-build-trunk-missing-dependency-tp3080075p3080160.html

> only be a problem if you're targeting a mobile or other embedded
> environment. If you do and there's wider demand for something like this, we
> might want to consider including such a jackrabbit-lite package in our
> normal releases.
>> I've seen the output of the mvn dependency:tree but I was curious if
>> some of the poi dependencies can be excluded at runtime.
> The POI libraries are used for full text indexing of various Microsoft file
> formats, most notably MS Office.
> --
> Jukka Zitting

View raw message