[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-3088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Steiner resolved FOP-3088.
--------------------------------
Fix Version/s: main
Resolution: Fixed
https://github.com/apache/xmlgraphics-fop/commit/64585e49741c561e313dd751458d8660dca8f708
> [PATCH] Jar packaging duplicates classes on classpath
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FOP-3088
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-3088
> Project: FOP
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Skip de Groot
> Assignee: Simon Steiner
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: main
>
> Attachments: 3088-patch.diff
>
>
> I have a gradle project where we import apache fop with the following:
> {code:java}
> implementation("org.apache.xmlgraphics:fop:2.6") {code}
> Which results in the following dependencies being loaded on the classpath (I
> have removed the sub dependencies for simplicity)
> {code:java}
> org.apache.xmlgraphics:fop -> 2.6
> +--- org.apache.xmlgraphics:fop-util:2.6
> +--- org.apache.xmlgraphics:fop-events:2.6
> \--- org.apache.xmlgraphics:fop-core:2.6 {code}
> So far so good and everything works most of the time. I suspect any maven
> project would import in the same way.
> However, most classes are duplicated in fop-2.6.jar and their respective sub
> module. For instance, the org.apache.fop.apps.FOUserAgent class is packaged
> both in fop and fop-core.
> All classes from the fop-events module in org.apache.fop.events package are
> also duplicated, but not from the org.apache.fop.tools package from the
> fop-events module (For instance org.apache.fop.tools.EventProducerCollector),
> making this also inconsistent somehow.
> Luckily both implementations seem the same but it is bad practice to have
> duplicate classes on the classpath, and package sizes are also doubled.
>
> Depending on the implementation choice I would either expect a fatty jar with
> all the classes packaged which does not import anything or an somewhat empty
> root fop jar with all classes imported by the sub modules. As it stands now
> it seems to be a combination of both and not a completely consistant one
> either.
> Which one is the prefered solution of this project?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
