Shipping fat jar?

[Andrus Adamchik]

I am considering whether we should stop shipping the "fat"  
cayenne.jar in 3.0 (would've been called cayenne-server-deps.jar  
according to the new naming convention). The original motivation for  
it goes back to the days when full CLASSPATH had to be specified when  
running "javac" and "java" from command line. So it saved quite a bit  
of typing. With Ant, Eclipse and war format this seems obsolete.  
Instead I thought we might include a minimal set of runtime  
dependencies in the "lib/third-party" folder.

Anybody thinks it is a bad idea to get rid of the fat jar?
Andrus