General comment without specifics. I think shading should be used* on a case by case basis* when the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. How about exploring alternatives such as modularization, dependency management, or careful dependency selection, before resorting to shading? My point is that shading will introduce more debugging and testing as packages will be renamed impacting flexibility. Case in point, things like unit and integration tests may need adjustments to account for the renamed packages.
HTH Mich Talebzadeh, Architect | Data Science | Financial Crime | GDPR & Compliance Specialist PhD <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy> Imperial College London <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_College_London> London, United Kingdom view my Linkedin profile <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mich-talebzadeh-ph-d-5205b2/> https://en.everybodywiki.com/Mich_Talebzadeh *Disclaimer:* The information provided is correct to the best of my knowledge but of course cannot be guaranteed . It is essential to note that, as with any advice, quote "one test result is worth one-thousand expert opinions (Werner <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun>Von Braun <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun>)". On Sat, 7 Dec 2024 at 06:21, Holden Karau <holden.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Y'all, > > As we're getting closer to 4.0 I was thinking now is a good time for us to > try and reduce the class path we expose for JVM users. Are there any common > classes/packages folks would like to see shaded? > > Cheers, > > Holden :) > > -- > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau > Fight Health Insurance: https://www.fighthealthinsurance.com/ > <https://www.fighthealthinsurance.com/?q=hk_email> > Books (Learning Spark, High Performance Spark, etc.): > https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9 <https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9> > YouTube Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/user/holdenkarau > Pronouns: she/her >
