[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-2852) SolrJ doesn't need woodstox jar

["Jan Høydahl (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2852?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16988928#comment-16988928 ] 

Jan Høydahl commented on SOLR-2852:
-----------------------------------

Yohoo! SolrJ should be as slim as possible. Now that JavaBin  is default, could we skip any xml lib dependency and let those who need it depend on some solr-solrj-extras.jar? Same with annotations, zookeeper and netty does etc?

> 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
>             Fix For: 8.4
>
>
> 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-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org