Skip to content
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

Issue #8540, add classifier for jetty-10.0.x #8541

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 3, 2022
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions jetty-bom/pom.xml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -210,6 +210,7 @@
<dependency>
<groupId>org.eclipse.jetty</groupId>
<artifactId>infinispan-remote</artifactId>
<classifier>config</classifier>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@MoonLord-LM MoonLord-LM Sep 6, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

@joakime joakime Sep 6, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Depending on the config classifier (only meaningful to jetty-home) in a bom is just super odd, and feels wrong.
Why not just have <type>pom</type> instead?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@MoonLord-LM MoonLord-LM Sep 6, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, I agree, <type>pom</type> is better.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@olamy can you think of any maven technical reason for not just using <type>pom</type> instead?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the bom is mostly made (e.g only useful) for embedded users.
So TBH I don't even understand why we have <artifactId>infinispan-remote</artifactId> in the bom. This module contains no code but only configuration files.
So except the config jar which contains the jetty configuration module files it's a totally useless artifact :)
Either we remove it from the bom or we "expose" the only useless artifact which is the config but frankly I even don't understand why :)
wdy? Remove the entry from the bom?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove the entry from the bom?

I'd vote +1 for this approach.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FTR #8554

<version>10.0.12-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
Expand All @@ -220,6 +221,7 @@
<dependency>
<groupId>org.eclipse.jetty</groupId>
<artifactId>infinispan-embedded</artifactId>
<classifier>config</classifier>
<version>10.0.12-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
Expand Down
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions pom.xml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1360,6 +1360,7 @@
<dependency>
<groupId>org.eclipse.jetty</groupId>
<artifactId>infinispan-embedded</artifactId>
<classifier>config</classifier>
<version>${project.version}</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
Expand All @@ -1370,6 +1371,7 @@
<dependency>
<groupId>org.eclipse.jetty</groupId>
<artifactId>infinispan-remote</artifactId>
<classifier>config</classifier>
<version>${project.version}</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
Expand Down