That scheme sounds fine to me. It is 2021, can windows deal with .tar.gz yet? :)

On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 6:12 AM Tomoko Uchida
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thank you Robert for your reply.
> For clarification, I think we will distribute a compressed tarball
> (and may be also a zip for Windows?) which contains luke JAR (the GUI)
> and its dependent JARs - not a fat or shaded jar. (I forgot to write
> the important details in the previous mail.)
>
> Tomoko
>
> 2021年5月29日(土) 12:37 Robert Muir <[email protected]>:
> >
> > +1, it is an application. So let's package it in a way, so that it is
> > easy to run this application.
> > This is a bit different than packaging a library: different target
> > audience for example (developers vs. operations and other folks)
> >
> > Definitely +1 to give luke its own "artifact" that might work a bit
> > differently than the usual library artifacts. The most extreme might
> > be a kind of shaded application jar, very friendly to the common case,
> > but perhaps most hostile to expert cases (such as adding custom
> > analyzers and codecs to classpath). Maybe it's the right tradeoff
> > though, or something in between: seems like we can sort out those
> > details.
> >
> > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 11:10 PM Tomoko Uchida
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > As a byproduct of LUCENE-9448, we now have a neat gradle task (thank
> > > you Dawid!) to assemble a standalone Luke package.
> > >
> > > I think it makes sense to distribute the standalone "Luke app" that
> > > contains only its executable-jar and minimum dependencies to run it,
> > > as it used to be, on Lucene download page (
> > > https://lucene.apache.org/core/downloads.html ).
> > >
> > > Pros:
> > > - Easy to understand for users who need it
> > > - No need to rely on strange hacks to discover dependencies (jars) for
> > > running it
> > >
> > > Cons:
> > > - Duplication of many jars (analyzers, queries, codec, etc.)
> > >
> > > I am sure it makes sense for long-term Luke users who used to just
> > > download Luke from the original or forked sites - but let me know if
> > > there is anyone who has thoughts (eg. from the aritifact maintainers'
> > > perspective) on it.
> > > If there is no objection/concern, I will explore what changes are
> > > required to do so on LUCENE-9978.
> > >
> > > Final note: It doesn't affect ongoing 9.0 release. With the assemble
> > > task, Luke works just fine as before.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Tomoko
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to