-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 878
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Move DataStax shaded Guava module into Java driver #1983
base: 4.x
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@@ -66,8 +66,8 @@ | |||
<exclude>org.apache.cassandra:java-driver-core</exclude> | |||
<exclude>org.apache.cassandra:java-driver-mapper-runtime</exclude> | |||
<exclude>org.apache.cassandra:java-driver-mapper-processor</exclude> | |||
<exclude>org.apache.cassandra:java-driver-guava-shaded</exclude> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Manually verified the tar.gz, looks good.
limitations under the License. | ||
|
||
--> | ||
<assembly xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/ASSEMBLY/2.0.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/ASSEMBLY/2.0.0 http://maven.apache.org/xsd/assembly-2.0.0.xsd"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Manually inspected the shaded jar, also looking good.
508ac2f
to
3ef49df
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good to me
So, I think this is fine as it stands, and it appears to accomplish the goal we want but I can't help but wonder... do we really even need this JAR anymore? Is there a clear argument for including this shaded JAR vs. just including (as a shaded JAR or as a stated dependency) Guava directly? The above may be a dumb question; it's quite possible there's some aspect of this I'm not seeing. But as I look through this code I can't help but think that we're going to a lot of trouble to create a dependency from a shaded Guava JAR which seems... like something we could do without all that trouble. |
bom/pom.xml
Outdated
<dependency> | ||
<groupId>org.apache.cassandra</groupId> | ||
<artifactId>java-driver-guava-shaded</artifactId> | ||
<version>4.18.2-SNAPSHOT</version> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So we're versioning the shaded JAR based on... the driver release, which means we need to release a new version with every driver release... whether we've upgraded Guava or not? This seems... strange.
Based on conversation in ASF Slack it sounds like this might be moving in the direction of adding Guava to core-shaded and just making Guava a straight dependency for the non-shaded build. This creates two very distinct configurations: one with zero shading (the core JAR) and one with multiple major dependencies shaded (core-shaded). If users experience conflicts with the Guava version in use in their application and what the Java driver needs we can recommend those users move to core-shaded. The analysis above is not settled yet, however, so this could still change. |
patch by Lukasz Antoniak; reviewed by Alexandre Dutra and Erik Merkle for CASSJAVA-52 Update pom.xml Co-authored-by: Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]>
93b4c1d
to
7641f18
Compare
Declared Guava as a dependency to core module. Changes pushed. @absurdfarce, @adutra: I still have a problem with |
Checking if TinyBundles will do the job. |
I ended up implementing |
668b9d1
to
d478294
Compare
Fixes CASSJAVA-52.