NihalJain commented on PR #131: URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase-thirdparty/pull/131#issuecomment-2760337996
> Updated PR with both EE8 + EE9 changes (for testing purpose), will rerun UTs locally and update. Also renamed [hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-shaded-jetty-ee8) to [hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-shaded-jetty-12-plus) for time being I ran the UTs with the https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/6783 and all tests passed locally. We are good with a single package for eeX. > Do you think it would make sense to split this up, so that we have a base shaded jetty package, and separate jee8 and jee9 shaded packages ? In HBase it may not help as our jetty-core and eeX specific imports happen together. I mean we don't seem to have an module which only depends on jetty but not eeX. We would eventually end up with including both dependencies to our module pom's. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
