On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > It makes perfect sense. Some of us do, however, embed Solr (for tests > or other unrecommended reasons), or build our own Solr plugins with > dependencies on the existing Solr plugins, and we would thus mourn, or > have to go back to doing extra work, if you stopped publication of > Solr artifacts altogether. >
Yeah I actually think the monolithic approach is not ideal, i would prefer something more modular. But i'm balancing this against the costs of over 100 third party dependencies, which is currently overwhelming the project (or at least, release managers). We might be able to simplify things with other approaches, too: just as an example, over half of solr's third-party jars are in contrib modules, some things that might be a better fit as client-side integrations or just separate plugins, (maybe as separate projects under our TLP with their own release cycles, or on apache-extras, or anything like that). Or maybe we can just do a full scrub and try to see which dependencies we can remove. I bet there are a few we could nuke. Its definitely overwhelming right now, the size of the codebase and the number of dependencies, given what we have. I think we should be considering all options. Maven packaging just adds to the complexity due to the fact of how it manages dependencies (they must themselves be in maven somehow). -- lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
