Help the Java community kill all überjars... /Anders
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Richard Sand <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Anders - thanks for your reply. I agree with your advice - for this > particular project artifact is a case where we want to offer both options, > and the uberjar is mainly an aggregation of our product apis. But I > definitely understand the danger you are describing. > > -Richard > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf > Of Anders Hammar > Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 2:08 AM > To: Maven Users List > Subject: Re: shade plugin usage > > First, try to stay away from the überjar path. It's normally not the way to > go today, but you should use the jar and it's dependencies instead. I've > seen many case where people use a überjar just to try to make their life > simpler but ending up with other issues instead. A proper classpath is the > way to go in my opinion. > > I guess your approach of deploying the überjar and a dep-reduced-pom would > work, but please remember to deploy it to your remote repo as well (and not > just your local repo). Somewhere in the back of my head I recall a similar > discussion earlier. Not sure if someone brought up any issues though. > Having said that, the reason for deploying the überjar at a separate > coordinate would be to have a separate pom with reduced deps. This > indicates > that you plan on use the pom to get the dependencies and in that case you > should try to stick with the original jar instead and work with the proper > set of deps. > > /Anders > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Richard Sand <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I've a project that uses shade to create an uberjar - since I want > > that uberjar artifact to be available for use in other projects, does > > it make sense to *not* attach the artifact in shade, but rather have > > shade create the uberjar and dependency-reduced-pom, and then use > > install:install-file to grab the uberjar and drp.xml and install with > > a new unique artifactid (as opposed to a classifier of the original > > artifact)? > > > > Still feeling my way down the Maven Way... > > > > -Richard > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
