I think removing them would be good for various reasons inc all you noted below.
On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 14:34, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > We currently deploy these following shaded uber jars with ActiveMQ Artemis. > > artemis-jms-client-all > artemis-core-client-all > artemis-jakarta-client-all > > We are in the process of removing jboss-logging, and replacing it by > SLF4j /LOG4J on a separate branch, and we will probably make a switch > on the branch as 3.0. > > I never really liked these shaded jars as part of the distribution. I > would be inclined to remove them on a switch for 3.0 anyways, and now > we are having a build issue, > as they will fail (on a second build) shading apache-commons-logging: > > ERROR] Failed to execute goal > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin:3.3.0:shade (default) on > project artemis-core-client-all: Error creating shaded jar: duplicate > entry: > META-INF/services/org.apache.activemq.artemis.shaded.org.apache.commons.logging.LogFactory > -> [Help 1] [ERROR] [ERROR] To see the full stack trace of the > errors, re-run Maven with the -e switch. [ERROR] Re-run Maven using > the -X switch to enable full debug logging. [ERROR] [ERROR] For more > information about the errors and possible solutions, please read the > following articles: [ERROR] [Help 1] > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/MojoExecutionException > [ERROR] [ERROR] After correcting the problems, you can resume the > build with the command [ERROR] mvn <args> -rf > :artemis-core-client-all > > > > > Also, they add about 20MB to our distribution, and more 10MB for the > core-client-all that's not on the distro but it is on maven repo. > > This is a common trend with other projects. Netty stopped producing a > netty-all and is offering a pom. Jetty did the same thing.. and There > are a lot of issues introduced by an "all client". > > > So, even though we could fix the build, these JARs are never tested as > part of the testsuite or anything.... It's like playing with the > odds... and they are huge on the distribution as they will all > include copies of Netty. > > > I would really like to remove these JARs and I think it would be a > great improvement to do so. > > These POMS are already defining all the dependencies anyway. Any user > who wants to have a shaded jar would just be able to shade it > themselves as part of their project. > > > If anyone have a strong feeling about keeping them we would need: > > - your opinion (why we keep them on 3.0) > - Help fixing the build on new-logging > - Help with adding smoke tests for these jars. > > > anyone?
