[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13260878#comment-13260878
]
Steven Rowe commented on SOLR-3405:
-----------------------------------
bq. Lets either drop maven artifacts for solr completely, or package maven
artifacts like everything else to prevent problems like commons-csv in the
future!
Robert, the only difference between solr binary distribution and maven
artifacts is the POMs, not the jars or the war.
When you say "packaging" you imply that the Solr Maven artifacts "include" 3rd
party jars. They don't. Their POMs say that those 3rd party jars are required
via non-optional dependency declarations.
> maven artifacts should be equivalent to binary packaging
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-3405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3405
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Build
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.0
>
>
> Lets take the commons-csv scenario:
> * apache-solr-3.5.0 binary distribution contains no actual commons-csv.jar
> anywhere,
> in fact it contains no third party jars (the stuff present in solr/lib) at
> all.
> * binary distribution contains only the jars necessary for *solrj* and
> *contrib plugins*, and a solr.war
> I think the maven artifacts should match whats in the binary release (no
> third party jars
> inside the .war are "exposed", we just publish the .war itself). This exposes
> a lot less surface area.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
