Re: Using jar inside a jar
On 23/01/15 21:42, Joerg Meier wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:46:21 +0000, Nigel Wade wrote:
On 23/01/15 12:12, Joerg Meier wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:10:35 +0000, Nigel Wade wrote:
I'm not a fan of the "big jar" concept. I much prefer to keep libraries in separate jar's. If a library class gets
updated it's only need to update a single library jar, rather than every "big jar" which contains that class.
Different areas, I'd say. For end users you almost never would want them to
update libraries on their own, unless your end users are developers.
Why not? End user, or system admin. I'd still not supply a "big bundled jar" unless there was a specific requirement to
do so.
When you get updates from Microsoft do you get a few small patched libraries, or GB's of statically linked applications
each time?
Depends on who provides the libraries. If it's third parties, like is the
case for most Java libraries, then I most certainly get them with each app
that uses them.If it's .NET, like the JRE, I tend to not get them bundled
other than a few exceptional cases.
Nobody guarantees you that newer versions of open source libraries will
behave 100% the same as the one you dev against.
Honestly, short of .NET, DirectX, OpenGL and similar giants, I know of no
library for Windows that isn't delivered along with the app that needs it.
I honestly can't remember the last time an installer said "To run this you
need to manually install library so and so", again, other than above
behemoths.
Do you and me live in different realities or do I misunderstand you ?
Liebe Gruesse,
Joerg
Well, yes, you clearly do misunderstand me completely.
In your scenario you describe applications as being supplied with libraries. Presumably those libraries can be
upgraded/patched without it being necessary to re-download the entire application and re-install it?
Also, if different applications share the requirement for the same library you only need to have 1 copy of that library,
not a different copy for each application?
Maybe Windows is different, and application developers think differently, but on Linux if I install/develop an
application which, for example, requires access openSSL libraries I wouldn't expect those libraries to be statically
linked into the application requiring the application to be downloaded and re-installed every time there was a change to
openSSL. I would expect to be able to upgrade the library via a different route, and the application will get the latest
update automatically via dynamic linking. The same applies to the "big jar" application. If any of the jar's bundled
into the "big jar" were updated the application wouldn't benefit from that change until the application developer
supplied you with an updated application, and you'd have to re-install the entire application all over, rather than just
the updated library jar.