Per offline discussion with Robert: He or I will get onto this, probably next week.
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> wrote: > Dependency conflicts were also the reason why we have to use a different > Akka version for the Hadoop 2.0.0-alpha build profile. > > Thus, +1. > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > I'm also in favor of shading commonly used libraries to resolve this > issue > > for our upstream users. > > > > I recently wrote this distributed TPC-H datagenerator, which had a hard > > dependency on a newer guava version. So I needed to shade guava in my > > project to make it work. > > Another candidate to shade is the ASM library. > > > > So you have my +1 for doing this. > > > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I think the way we shaded Guava is a problem for the way IntelliJ uses > > > maven (compile dependency projects, not package them). > > > > > > Since we do not apply relocation to our code for this, it should have > no > > > effect on the IDE usability. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 17 Feb 2015, at 09:40, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone! > > > > > > > > > > We have been time and time again struck by the problem that Hadoop > > > > bundles > > > > > many dependencies in certain versions, that conflict either with > > > versions > > > > > of the dependencies we use, or with versions that users use. > > > > > > > > > > The most prominent examples are Guava and Protobuf. > > > > > > > > > > One way to solve this is to create ourselves a "custom" Hadoop > > > > dependency: > > > > > We build a fat jar from Hadoop (with all its dependencies) and in > > this > > > > fat > > > > > jar shade Guava and Protobuf. > > > > > > > > > > We can use the flink-shading project for this - it is already used > to > > > > build > > > > > a custom (shaded) version of Guava for Flink. > > > > > > > > > > Any opinions on this? > > > > > > > > I'm not familiar with all the details, but from past experience I > > recall > > > > that this has been an issue for various users. I don't see all > > > implications > > > > of such a change (are there any down sides?), but in general I think > > that > > > > it will improve the overall user experience. Hence: +1. > > > > > >
