Should we create a jee spec bundle for Geronimo?

[Rick McGuire]

Working through the issues of getting openejb to build, I ran into a
classloading constraint violation between the openejb javaee-api bundle
that was getting pulled in as a dependency of openejb-ejbd.  What the
openejb project had done was create a bundle that pulled in all of the
different geronimo jee spec implementations into a single uber jar.  
This was fairly simple to add an exclusion to fix the problem at hand.

But this got me to thinking...would it be a good idea for geronimo to
create a similar jar and use that for the spec classes rather than
pulling in all of the spec jars individually?  This might help avoid
some of the conflicts we've been seeing on the spec implementation
classes and simplify a few things.

Rick

[djencks]

On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:55 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:

> Working through the issues of getting openejb to build, I ran into a  
> classloading constraint violation between the openejb javaee-api  
> bundle that was getting pulled in as a dependency of openejb-ejbd.  
> What the openejb project had done was create a bundle that pulled in  
> all of the different geronimo jee spec implementations into a single  
> uber jar.   This was fairly simple to add an exclusion to fix the  
> problem at hand.
>
> But this got me to thinking...would it be a good idea for geronimo  
> to create a similar jar and use that for the spec classes rather  
> than pulling in all of the spec jars individually?  This might help  
> avoid some of the conflicts we've been seeing on the spec  
> implementation classes and simplify a few things.

I'd rather keep them separate and let people assemble servers that  
don't have all the spec jars if they don't need all of them.  I'm not  
sure how we'd reduce conflicts by having a single jar.  I think you'd  
still need to add lots of maven exclusions just like you do now when  
the wrong jar starts showing up.  Am I missing something?

thanks
david jencks
>
> Rick

[Rick McGuire]

David Jencks wrote:

>
> On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:55 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
>
>> Working through the issues of getting openejb to build, I ran into a
>> classloading constraint violation between the openejb javaee-api
>> bundle that was getting pulled in as a dependency of openejb-ejbd.  
>> What the openejb project had done was create a bundle that pulled in
>> all of the different geronimo jee spec implementations into a single
>> uber jar.   This was fairly simple to add an exclusion to fix the
>> problem at hand.
>>
>> But this got me to thinking...would it be a good idea for geronimo to
>> create a similar jar and use that for the spec classes rather than
>> pulling in all of the spec jars individually?  This might help avoid
>> some of the conflicts we've been seeing on the spec implementation
>> classes and simplify a few things.
>
> I'd rather keep them separate and let people assemble servers that
> don't have all the spec jars if they don't need all of them.  I'm not
> sure how we'd reduce conflicts by having a single jar.  I think you'd
> still need to add lots of maven exclusions just like you do now when
> the wrong jar starts showing up.  Am I missing something?

It just seemed to be easier to deal with situations like the openejb one
where they were combining all of the specs into a single jar.  It just
seemed like if they were doing that, then the jar should have been
coming from us.

>
> thanks
> david jencks
>>
>> Rick
>
>