Good catch Gal.

Regards,
Dor

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Baker [mailto:aba...@pivotal.io] 
Sent: יום ב 07 נובמבר 2016 01:20
To: geode <dev@geode.incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: classpath in geode release


> On Nov 6, 2016, at 7:47 AM, Gal Palmery <gal.palm...@amdocs.com> wrote:
> 
> Clarification - 
> This is in the geode-dependencies.jar and gfsh-dependencies.jar that were 
> created by the local build that I run on my PC. 
> I downloaded the 1.0.0-incubating release and built it using the following 
> command:
>>      gradlew clean build installDist -Dskip.tests=true
> 

Yep, this looks like a bug, though probably harmless.  The geode-core 
dependencies pull in v2.8.0 transitively:

+--- com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind:2.8.2
|    +--- com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.8.0
|    \--- com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core:2.8.2

while the geode-pulse and geode-web-api modules pull in v2.8.2 with an explicit 
dependency.  These should be filtered when we build the classpath.  See 
GEODE-2078.

> where can I find these jars (geode-dependencies.jar and 
> gfsh-dependencies.jar) that are created each nightly build? 
> I tried in the maven central repository, but they are not there.

There jars aren’t published to maven as they are manifest-only jars meant for 
cmd line usage.  The build artifacts can be found in jenkins (see 
https://builds.apache.org/job/Geode-nightly) but those should only be used for 
development purposes and are not official releases.

> 
> Thanks,
> Gal
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gal Palmery 
> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 11:43
> To: dev@geode.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: classpath in geode release
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I noticed that there are 2 jackson-annotations jars, and 2 slf4j-api jars 
> with different versions in the classpath (in the MANIFESTs of 
> geode-dependencies.jar and in gfsh-dependencies.jar).
> What is the reason for that? Is this a bug?
> 
> Thanks,
> Gal
> 
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at 
> http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp

Reply via email to