Re: [orbit-dev] Multiple bundle recipes for httpclient-* vs. a single on

[Roland Grunberg <rgrunber@xxxxxxxxxx>]

 > > I can clearly see that maven central does contain finer grained and
> > aggregated dependencies for this stack so my argument about the finer
> > grained approach being more popular isn't right.
> 
> I don't understand this sentence, sorry.

Initially I argued we should use httpclient-cache, httpclient-fluent,
httpclient, because maven central didn't have a combined offering, so we
shouldn't diverge from what was likely the most common form of
distributing. However, I could easily be wrong because httpclient-osgi
does exist and combines the above mentioned bundles.

> > I suppose we need to file a separate CQ for httpclient-osgi since it
> > may container additional things on top of just httpclient-cache, and
> > httpclient-fluent ? Feel free to do so and when it's approved we can
> > just change the GAV being pulled in by orbit-recipes, and address the
> > osgi.bnd file with any changes. This will be targeted for M6 which
> > will be the last chance to make such changes.
> 
> I just did a diff between the contents of
> org.apache.httpcomponents.httpclient_4.5.2.v20161115-1643.jar currently
> in Orbit and httpclient-osgi-4.5.2.jar from Maven Central. The latter
> contains indeed a bit more code:
> 
> - A shaded org.apache.httpcomponents:httpclient-cache:4.5.2
> - A shaded org.apache.httpcomponents:httpclient-mime:4.5.2
> - A shaded org.apache.httpcomponents:fluent-hc:4.5.2
> 
> All this is expected and shouldn't cause any problems. But then there is
> also
> 
> - A shared commons-codec:commons-codec:1.9
> 
> That this is shaded rather than an imported is odd. (Also, we would need
> a CQ for this, as Orbit contains only 1.6.0 of commons-codec.)

Any chance that it'll work against 1.6 ? If not, then we just need to
confirm the shaded version is identical to 1.9 and then just file the CQs
and of course excluded the shaded part from the final bundle (replacing
with proper osgi import-packages)

> And then there is this addition in httpclient-osgi:
> 
> - The org.apache.http.osgi.* packages and an OSGI-INF/metatype directory
> 
> I am not sure whether these would do any harm.
> 
> I think I will try putting together recipes for both approaches, build
> AERI with either and see whether anything breaks when installed into M5.
> 
> Does this sound reasonable?

Sounds good.

Cheers,
-- 
Roland Grunberg