> On Jun 21, 2017, at 8:06 AM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > wrote: > > Ok I changed the android stuff to build with Java8 and to use retrolambda to > produce a java7 version and ensure it’s valid java7 using the animalsniffer > plugin. So that should be ok. I noticed that. Thanks!
> The thing with empty jars is that if for example I would be building some > application with maven targeting android, the application will contain one > and the same artifact name twice … it would be > edgent-connectors-common-1.2.0-SNAPSHOT.jar (the one from android) and > edgent-connectors-common-1.2.0-SNAPSHOT.jar (the one from java7) … this will > definitely cause problems. Woops, I forgot the detail that they’ll have the same file names :-) > I think I’ll go down the path of repacking the java7 jars as android jars and > to deploy them with the android groupId. I know that we will be providing > technically the same content twice, but I guess the benefits of this approach > overweigh the disadvantages of the other options. Sounds good. At one point someone suggested that perhaps there should only be a single Edgent “runtime” (or core) jar for everything that’s currently in the binary release bundle’s “lib” directory - edgent.api, edgent.providers, edgent.runtime, edgent.spi. I don’t know if we’ll want to head in that direction at some point but I’ll ask: how possible / disruptive that would be later on with the mvn tooling? — Dale
