So as the person who added the shaded jars, this was a requirement to make it far easier for those who DO NOT use tools like maven to be able to build an application without having to copy a large dependency tree of libs, which yes for maven or gradle is fine as they handle the dependency tree, as those tools do this. But unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world, and providing the shaded allows those users to use the client. Im happy to look at why moving logging to slf4j brings an issue, im unsure why it does tbh, its just another lib, and as long as you shade correctly it should be fine, ive seen it shaded in many other projects.With this i am going on leave for a bit, so unlikely i will get to have a look at it for a week or two.BestMike On 26 Jul 2022, at 21:44, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> wrote:To be clear, the documentation already exists [1]. It just needs to beupdated with the aforementioned details when the uber jars are removed.Justin[1]https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/client-classpath.htmlOn Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:39 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>wrote:sure, of course we need to update the docs in relation to anythingthese removed jars. What I meant was we need to document the jars thatare required independently of removing the jars.. if someone wants touse the client jars the client dependency should be documented anyway.that's what I meantOn Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:25 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>wrote:>> I'm not sure what you mean by "independent issue." If we remove the uber> jars then the docs have to be updated. The two things are directlyrelated,> right?>>> Justin>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 2:13 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>> wrote:>> > I think that’s an independent issue. The doc would need to be updated> > anyways.> >> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>> > wrote:> >> > > Yes, the documentation needs to be clear. This is a usability issue.> > >> > > Even if you did a "mvn dependency:list" you'd get a list including> > optional> > > and test dependencies. Also, there
would be potentially unnecessary> > > dependencies (e.g. netty-transport-native-kqueue even if you aren'ton a> > > Mac).> > >> > >> > > Justin> > >> > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 1:30 PM Clebert Suconic <> > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > > >> > > wrote:> > >> > > > the pom on artemis-core-client, artemis-jms-client, and> > > > artemis-jakarta-client... They will include all the needed> > > > dependencies, right?> > > >> > > >> > > > what is the issue? to have a clear text on the docs?> > > >> > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 2:01 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>> > > > wrote:> > > > >> > > > > The original impetus for the uber jar was ARTEMIS-1129. The issue> > there> > > > was> > > > > that it wasn't clear what jars were needed on the client. If we> > remove> > > > the> > > > > uber jars then we need to update the documentation to makecrystal> > > clear> > > > > what jars are needed on the client, including details about whatjars> > > may> > > > > be optional depending on which functionality the client uses.> > > > >> > > > > I'm not necessarily against it, but removing the uber jar isprobably> > > > going> > > > > to sting for a handful of users. Anything we can do to alleviatethat> > > > will> > > > > help. Maybe we could generate a text file in lib/client insteadof> > the> > > > uber> > > > > jars to help users who expect them to be there. The text couldlist> > the> > > > > jars required for the client's classpath.> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Justin> > > > >> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1129> > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 8:40 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > > clebert.suco...@gmail.com>> > > > > wrote:>
> > > >> > > > > > We currently deploy these following shaded uber jars withActiveMQ> > > > Artemis.> > > > > >> > > > > > artemis-jms-client-all> > > > > > artemis-core-client-all> > > > > > artemis-jakarta-client-all> > > > > >> > > > > > We are in the process of removing jboss-logging, and replacingit> > 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 Mavenusing> > > > > > the -X switch to enable full debug logging. [ERROR] [ERROR]For> > more> > > > > > information about the errors and possible solutions, pleaseread> > the> > > > > > following articles: [ERROR] [Help 1]> > > > > >> > > >> >http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/MojoExecutionException> > > > > > [ERROR] [ERROR] After correcting the problems, you can resumethe> > > > > > build with the command [ERROR] mvn <args> -rf> > > > > >
:artemis-core-client-all> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Also, they add about 20MB to our distribution, and more 10MBfor> > the> > > > > > core-client-all that's not on the distro but it is on mavenrepo.> > > > > >> > > > > > 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 nevertested> > > as> > > > > > part of the testsuite or anything.... It's like playing withthe> > > > > > 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 wouldbe 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 wouldneed:> > > > > >> > > > > > - 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?> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > > >> > >>
> --> > Clebert Suconic> >--Clebert Suconic
