[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15730?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17817514#comment-17817514
]
Jan Høydahl commented on SOLR-15730:
------------------------------------
See discussion in sub task SOLR-16078, where I propose a new {{solrj-jetty}}
artifact and a slim {{{}solrj-core{}}}. Continuing the discussion of overall
strategy here in the parent issue.
Separate artifacts require unique java package names, so there will inevitably
be java package name changes too, such as
{code:java}
org.apache.solr.client.solrj.impl.Http2SolrClient ->
org.apache.solr.client.solrj.jetty.impl.Http2SolrClient{code}
Or do we perhaps want to use {{org.apache.solr.solrj.jetty}} to keep package
name same as group-ID? If we need to split packages anyway, users will need to
change their imports either way.
I don't think we need a "fat" jar with everything, what usecase would that be
for? Thus, I can be convinced to use {{org.apache.solr.solrj:solrj}} as the
default slim client instead of {{{}solrj-core{}}}.
> Modularize SolrJ
> ----------------
>
> Key: SOLR-15730
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15730
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: SolrJ
> Reporter: Jan Høydahl
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: Skjermbilde 2021-10-28 kl. 15.38.40.png
>
> Time Spent: 1h 50m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Umbrella issue for breaking up SolrJ into a slim solrj-core with minimal
> dependencies as well as solrj-zk, solrj-streaming, solrj-jdbc etc as needed.
> We can move relevant other JIRAs as sub-tasks to this one to keep everything
> together.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@solr.apache.org
