Is it portable? Was accessor module generated (= are the changes we do to it safe?) Le 13 janv. 2013 23:37, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > On Jan 13, 2013, at 2:06 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Jan 13, 2013, at 1:56 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> > >> On Jan 13, 2013, at 12:32 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> On Jan 13, 2013, at 9:34 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> two questions about next release and dependencies: > >>>> 1) David reworked our JavaEE descriptors parsing to use sxc. In this > >>>> refactoring we now use woodstox under the stax api (was it mandatory?) > >>>> -> do we want it? if yes do we shade it or simply skip it in the > >>>> classloader to avoid classloader issues if an app provides it? (+ > 500ko > >>>> about) > >>> > >>> Digging in the SXC code to see how tightly woodstox is integrated. > >> > >> Interestingly enough the built-in vm impl appears to be faster on the > unmarshal. Getting encoding errors on the marshal though. Digging into it. > > > > Never mind, my IDE classpath as 3 copies of woodstocks, 2 of jettison > and of course the built-in vm version (intellij's maven support doesn't > really manage the classpath like maven does). Let me clean up and try > again. > > Confirmed. The com.sun.* impl is indeed faster for our purposes than > Woodstox. Yanked Woodstox from the openejb-jee-accessors module. > > > -David > >
