struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Lindal <lind...@yahoo-inc.com>
Subject Re: XWork maven-shade-plugin configuation
Date Tue, 01 Feb 2011 16:36:43 GMT
It sounds like a good discussion to have.

Why do you consider its position precarious?  Stability is good in the corp world :)

John


On 2/1/11 8:32 AM, "Dave Newton" <davelnewton@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't recall the original reason for the shading anymore.

Part of it was wrapped up in a discussion about removing XW functionality
that dupes Commons stuff, which never really got started on.

There are some corners that really need some dusting--I think S2 is in kind
of a precarious position right now.

Do people have any interest in thinking about what direction(s) S2 wants to
go in at this point?

Dave

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:21 AM, John Lindal <lindalj@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

> The reason I don't think  io needs to be shaded is because io was never
> actually shaded.  Lang was being shaded into io, which can't possibly be
> right.
>
> >                                 <relocation>
> > -
>  <pattern>org.apache.commons.lang</pattern>
> > +                                    <pattern>org.apache.commons.io
> </pattern>
> >
> <shadedPattern>org.apache.commons.io.xwork</shadedPattern>
> >                                 </relocation>
>
> I've been running a patched version of Struts 2.2.1 without shading either
> asm or io for months now.  That's why I asked if I should just remove the
> shading, to reduce the jar size.
>
> John
>
>
> On 1/31/11 8:40 PM, "Maurizio Cucchiara" <maurizio.cucchiara@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> John,
> I didn't follow the asm's matter, but as I said a couple of days ago
> [1] struts-core already depends on commons-io library (actually is a
> fileupload's dependency), so there cannot be a struts application
> without common-io library along its path.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WW-3549
>
> On 30 January 2011 20:30, John Lindal <lindalj@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> > In regards to this ticket:
> >
> >  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XW-388
> >
> > Nothing in the entire Struts2 code base references either
> org.apache.commons.io.xwork or org.objectweb.asm.xwork.  I assume these
> relocations were intended to be for internal use only?  If so, we could
> significantly reduce the size of the XWork jar by removing these relocations
> from the pom.xml.
> >
> > Any objections?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Maurizio Cucchiara
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>


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