calcite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: jackson inside avatica jar
Date Fri, 26 Feb 2016 18:27:52 GMT
Calcite core/pom.xml uses Jackson but doesn’t have an explicit dependency. You removed the
explicit dependency 6 months ago in https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/cb7c213 <https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/cb7c213>.

When we further separate Avatica from Calcite maybe we’ll revisit how core gets its Jackson.

Julian


> On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> (being lazy -- sorry) Does Calcite rely on the Jackson coming in from Avatica now? Or
is it purely just there because of the shading?
> 
> Julian Hyde wrote:
>> Is it reasonable to have a maven profile that uses jackson as “provided”[1] rather
than shading? This would not be the default — the default would be continue to use a shaded
version of jackson (relocated to org.apache.calcite.jackson, as Josh suggests) — but folks
looking to embed calcite/avatica in a container might appreciate a lighter weight option.
>> 
>> Julian
>> 
>> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6646959/difference-between-maven-scope-compile-and-provided-for-jar-packaging<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6646959/difference-between-maven-scope-compile-and-provided-for-jar-packaging>
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:03 AM, Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Kai,
>>> 
>>> Avatica includes Jackson for the JSON parser (one of the serialization mechanisms
that Avatica uses). The Avatica client is designed to be a single-artifact to make deployments
for users very simple.
>>> 
>>> That being said, since we're shading in Jackson, we should relocate it to avoid
problems for you downstream in Calcite "proper". Want to open a JIRA issue? Thanks for bringing
it up.
>>> 
>>> - Josh
>>> 
>>> Kai Gülzau wrote:
>>>> Hi *,
>>>> 
>>>> what’s the reason for including the whole Jackson jar inside the avatica
jar?
>>>> We are just using the calcite sql parser and are using a newer version of
Jackson as included in avatica.
>>>> 
>>>> As a result we can’t use the newer functionality of Jackson since the included
version is used :-\
>>>> 
>>>> From my point of view it doesn’t make sense to include Jackson (with the
normal package path) when it is also a compile dependency…
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> When I have read it correctly in an older post
>>>> “When we come to consensus on shading that could be another JIRA case.”
>>>> It time to open a JIRA case?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Kai
>> 
>> 


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message