You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@maven.apache.org by Paul Hammant <pa...@hammant.org> on 2008/12/10 19:44:23 UTC
mvn classworlds:uberjar
There was a conversion on this list in August that suggested jarjar,
minijar & shade style of working.
Selenium needs to bundle Jetty in its server jar. Jetty is
notoriously hard to 'shade' given there are a gazillion fine grained
issues around reflection and other dependancies like the servlet api
(should that be shaded too ?).
The Uberjar way would preserve original class names, but hide them all
from other things in the classpath. Selenium server is booted from
the command line via a main() method obviously - thus it is an ideal
case for Uberjar
Did anyone quantify how much and in what way things were slower with
Uberjar ?
Regards,
- Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: mvn classworlds:uberjar
Posted by Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de>.
Paul Hammant wrote at Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2008 00:29:
> There's one-jar now as a replacement for uber-jar.
>
> It looks much faster - I'm running with that.
In M1 we used javaapp instead - I suppose this did the same.
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: mvn classworlds:uberjar
Posted by Paul Hammant <pa...@hammant.org>.
There's one-jar now as a replacement for uber-jar.
It looks much faster - I'm running with that.
Cheers,
- Paul
On Dec 10, 2008, at 1:49 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Paul Hammant wrote:
>
>> There was a conversion on this list in August that suggested jarjar,
>> minijar & shade style of working.
>>
>> Selenium needs to bundle Jetty in its server jar. Jetty is
>> notoriously hard to 'shade' given there are a gazillion fine grained
>> issues around reflection and other dependancies like the servlet api
>> (should that be shaded too ?).
>>
>> The Uberjar way would preserve original class names, but hide them
>> all
>> from other things in the classpath. Selenium server is booted from
>> the command line via a main() method obviously - thus it is an ideal
>> case for Uberjar
>>
>> Did anyone quantify how much and in what way things were slower with
>> Uberjar ?
>
> I had once a client connecting to a WLS and added the weblogic.jar
> to its
> deps. I used the uberjar to have one fine single jar to start
> anything.
> Well, after 45min the application actually was ready after startup.
> Without
> the uberjar it took less then 30sec. Questions? ;-)
>
> - Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: mvn classworlds:uberjar
Posted by Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de>.
Hi Paul,
Paul Hammant wrote:
> There was a conversion on this list in August that suggested jarjar,
> minijar & shade style of working.
>
> Selenium needs to bundle Jetty in its server jar. Jetty is
> notoriously hard to 'shade' given there are a gazillion fine grained
> issues around reflection and other dependancies like the servlet api
> (should that be shaded too ?).
>
> The Uberjar way would preserve original class names, but hide them all
> from other things in the classpath. Selenium server is booted from
> the command line via a main() method obviously - thus it is an ideal
> case for Uberjar
>
> Did anyone quantify how much and in what way things were slower with
> Uberjar ?
I had once a client connecting to a WLS and added the weblogic.jar to its
deps. I used the uberjar to have one fine single jar to start anything.
Well, after 45min the application actually was ready after startup. Without
the uberjar it took less then 30sec. Questions? ;-)
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org