[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2852?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17297835#comment-17297835
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on SOLR-2852:
-------------------------------------------------------
Commit cf1025e576a6cec6f724108994a778795cad6b64 in lucene-solr's branch
refs/heads/master from David Smiley
[ https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=cf1025e ]
SOLR-2852: SolrJ: remove Woodstox dependency (#2461)
It was never truly required there.
Pervasive use of "javabin" reduces the need to care about client-side XML
speed. Better to reduce dependencies and let clients use the libs they want.
> SolrJ doesn't need woodstox jar
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-2852
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2852
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: clients - java
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Priority: Minor
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> The /dist/solrj-lib/ directory contains wstx-asl-3.2.7.jar (Woodstox StAX
> API). SolrJ doesn't actually have any type of dependency on this library.
> The maven build doesn't have it as a dependency and the tests pass. Perhaps
> Woodstox is faster than the JDK's StAX, I don't know, but I find that point
> quite moot since SolrJ can use the efficient binary format. Woodstox is not
> a small library either, weighting in at 524KB, and of course if someone
> actually wants to use it, they can.
> I propose woodstox be removed as a SolrJ dependency. I am *not* proposing it
> be removed as a Solr WAR dependency since it is actually required there due
> to an obscure XSLT issue.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
