I have a Maven 3 project that uses Hibernate 3. In the Hibernate properties file, there is an entry for hibernate.connection.provider_class with the class corresponding to the C3P0 connection provider (org.hibernate.connection.C3P0ConnectionProvider). Obviously, this class is only used at runtime, so I don't need to add the corresponding dependency in my POM with the compile scope. Now, I want to give the possibility to use any connection pooling framework desired, so I also don't add a runtime dependency to the POM.
What is the best practice?
I thought about adding an entry to the classpath corresponding to the runtime dependency (in this case, hibernate-c3p0) when the application is run (for example, using the command line). But, I don't know if it's possible.
This is almost (maybe exactly) the same problem as with SLF4J. I don't know if Hibernate also uses the facade pattern for connection pooling.
Thanks
Since your code doesn't depend on the connection pooling (neither the main code nor the tests need it), there is no point to mention the dependency anywhere.
If anyone should mention it, then that would be Hibernate because Hibernate offers this feature in its config.
But you can add it to your POM with optional: true to indicate:
I support this feature
If you use it, then I recommend this framework and this version
That will make life slightly more simple for consumers of your project.
But overall, you should not mention features provided/needed by other projects unless they have some impact on your code (like when you offer a more simple way to configure connection pooling for Hibernate).
[EDIT] Your main concern is probably how to configure the project for QA. The technical term for this new movement is "DevOps" - instead of producing a dump WAR which the customer (QA) has to configure painstakingly, configuration is part of the development process just like everything else. What you pass on is a completely configured, ready-to-run setup.
To implement this, create another Maven module called "project-qa" which depends on your project and everything else you need to turn the dead code into a running application (so it will depend on DBCP plus it will contain all the necessary config files).
Maven supports overlayed WARs which will allow you to implement this painlessly.
You can mark your dependency as optional. In this case it will not be packaged into archives. In this case you have to ensure that your container provides required library.
You could use a different profile for each connection provider. In each profile you put the runtime dependency that correspond to the connection provider you want to use and change the hibernate.connection.provider_class property accordingly.
For more details about how to configure dependencies in profiles, see Different dependencies for different build profiles in maven.
To see how to change the value of the hibernate.connection.provider_class property see How can I change a .properties file in maven depending on my profile?
Related
Experts,
I need some expert advice on how to approach the below use case in spring boot.
I need to have a maven multi-module approach to my project.
I need to have a single jar as output of the final build process.
There are to be common modules for controllers, data access and other functionality
Other modules are to be created based on functionality domain for eg a module for Payroll, a module for Admin etc etc.
Each domain functional module will then have their own controllers extending the common controller, exception handler and so on.
Each module will also have its own set of thyme leaf pages.
The reason for following such an approach is we have development in phases and we will be rolling out based on functional modules.
Here are the issues that I can sense using this approach.
Where do I add the spring web dependency? If I add to the parent pom - it gets replicated across the children and there will be port conflict issues as each module loads. the same issue will also be there the moment I add it to two child modules.
How do I build the fat jar which has all the jars from all modules and works as the final deployment?
All the text that I read i can't see anything even close to what I am trying to achieve.
AD1. They will not unless you are trying to setup independent application context in each module. Of course you can do that(it might be complicated but I believe it's achievable), but for me it's an overkill. Personally I think it's better to have one application context and rely on scanning components that are present in classpath.
AD2. The structure in maven might be a little bit complicated and overwhelming at first glance but it makes sense. Here's how I see it:
Create a parent module that will aggregate each module in project and will declare library/plugin dependencies for submodules.
Create 1-N shared submodules that will be used in other modules. With come common logic, utils, etc.
Create 1-N submodules that will be handling your business logic
Create an application submodule that creates application context and loads configuration and components from classpath
Create a submodule that will be responsible for packaging process, either to war, jar, uber-jar or whatever else you desire. Maven jar plugin should do that for you. For executable uber-jar, you have dedicated tool from spring.
Now you can choose three ways(these ways I know) of loading your modules.
1. Include some modules in maven build based on the build configuration via maven profiles and let spring IoC container load all the components he finds in the classpath
2. Include all of the modules in maven build and load them depending on spring active profiles - you can think about it as of feature flag. You annotate your components or configuration class with #Profile("XYZ") telling spring IoC container whether to instantiate component or not. You will need (most flexible solution) to provide a property file which tells spring which profiles are active and thus which modules should be loaded
3. Mix of these two above.
Solution 1 pros:
build is faster (modules that are not included will be skipped during build)
final build file is light (modules that are not included are... not included ;))
nobody can run module that is not present
Solution 1 contras:
project descriptor in maven may explode as you might have many different profiles
Solution 2 pros:
it's fairly easy and fun to maintain modules from code
less mess in project descriptor
Solution 2 contras:
somebody can run module that is not intended to be run as it's present in classpath, but just excluded during runtime via spring active profiles
final build file might be overweight - unused code is still present in code
build might take longer - unused code will be compiled
Summary:
It's not easy to build well structured project from scratch. It's much more easier to create a monolith and then split it into modules. It's because if you already created a project, you've probably already identified all the domains and relations between them.
Over past 8 years of using maven, I honestly and strongly recommend using gradle as it's far more flexible than maven. Maven is really great tool, but when it comes to weird customization it often fails as it's build capabilities rely on plugins. You can't write a piece of code on the fly to perform some custom build behaviour while buidling your project, you must have a dedicated plugin for doing that. If such plugin exists it's fine, if it's not you will probably end up writing your own and handling its shipment, so anyone in your company can easily perform project build.
I hope it helps. Have fun ;)
I am creating a library using spring-boot (v2.1.6.RELEASE) as a starter project that will facilitate as base extension jar responsible for configuring and starting up some of the components based on client project properties file.
The issue I am facing is that if the client project's SpringBoot Application class contains the same package path as library everything works like charm! but when client project contains different package path and includes ComponentScan, it is not able to load or start components from the library.
Did anyone encounter this issue? how to make client application to auto-configure some of the components from library jar?
Note: I am following the library creation example from here: https://www.baeldung.com/spring-boot-custom-starter
There are many things that can go wrong here, without seeing relevant parts of actual code its hard to tell something concrete. Out of my head, here are a couple of points for consideration that can hopefully lead to the solution:
Since we use starters in our applications (and sometimes people use explicit component scanning in there spring applications) and this obviously works, probably the issue is with the starter module itself. Don't think that the fact that the component scan is used alone prevents the starter from being loaded ;)
Make sure the starter is a: regular library and not packaged as a spring boot application (read you don't use spring boot plugin) and have <packaging>jar</packaging> in your pom.xml or whatever you use to build.
Make sure you have: src/main/resources/META-INF/spring.factories file
(case sensitive and everything)
Make sure that this spring.factories file indeed contains a valid reference on your configuration (java class annotated with #Configuration). If you use component scanning in the same package, it will find and load this configuration even without spring factories, in this case, its just kind of another portion of your code just packaged as a separate jar. So this looks especially "suspicious" to me.
Make sure that #Configuration doesn't have #Conditional-something - maybe this condition is not obeyed and the configuration doesn't start. For debugging purposes maybe you even should remove these #Conditional annotations just to ensure that the Configuration starts. You can also provide some logging inside the #Configuration class, like: "loading my cool library".
When we run a sample main program which reads a applicationContext.xml with a single bean..
how does Spring do the logging..and how can one overwrite the default logging.
I didnt see any log4j.xml in the spring dependencies as well..
Regards
This is described in the documentation:
Logging is a very important dependency for Spring because a) it is the only mandatory external dependency, b) everyone likes to see some output from the tools they are using, and c) Spring integrates with lots of other tools all of which have also made a choice of logging dependency. One of the goals of an application developer is often to have unified logging configured in a central place for the whole application, including all external components. This is more difficult than it might have been since there are so many choices of logging framework.
The mandatory logging dependency in Spring is the Jakarta Commons Logging API (JCL). We compile against JCL and we also make JCL Log objects visible for classes that extend the Spring Framework. It's important to users that all versions of Spring use the same logging library: migration is easy because backwards compatibility is preserved even with applications that extend Spring. The way we do this is to make one of the modules in Spring depend explicitly on commons-logging (the canonical implementation of JCL), and then make all the other modules depend on that at compile time. If you are using Maven for example, and wondering where you picked up the dependency on commons-logging, then it is from Spring and specifically from the central module called spring-core.
The nice thing about commons-logging is that you don't need anything else to make your application work. It has a runtime discovery algorithm that looks for other logging frameworks in well known places on the classpath and uses one that it thinks is appropriate (or you can tell it which one if you need to). If nothing else is available you get pretty nice looking logs just from the JDK (java.util.logging or JUL for short). You should find that your Spring application works and logs happily to the console out of the box in most situations, and that's important.
(emphasis mine)
Follow several sections describing how to use various logging frameworks.
I am developing a simple web application, using Spring Framework.
When I add Spring framework to my class path, I see that it has lot of jars which I never use (for example: spring-aop-3.2.3.RELEASE.jar).
Is it a good idea to keep the entire framework intact or remove unused jars?
If you need to remove unused jars, the best way is to use some dependency management tool like Ivy or Maven, and let the tool decide what the required dependencies are. Otherwise it will not be apparent what is really unused or not until you break something.
For instance, if you are using declarative transactions, then removing the AOP jar will cause breakage, because AOP is used to implement that functionality.
If you would rather not use dependency management, it's better to leave everything intact.
There are some cases where you do want to remove/exclude jars. Replacing commons-logging with slf4j is one example. Another example is excluding the log4j dependencies that get dragged in on account of some appender that's packaged with log4j but that you know you will never use. Dependency management tools allow you to tell them what needs to be excluded.
Doing without dependency management management and removing things because you never use them directly is too dangerous.
Is it not possible to include dependencies based on class properties? E.g. if I am building a framework that I want to integrate with any customer system, the type of DB the customer uses could be a variable but my framework may use it if it can acquire a data source. So in this case, my Maven project should be able to integrate with any DB by declaring the corresponding DB war as dependency.
E.g.
<dependency>
<artifactId>${database.artifactId}</artifactId>
....
</dependency>
But this database.artifactId in itself will be read from properties file that may be accesible to customer code, so the idea of having parent pom declare the versions and artifactId as mentioned here may not suit my case.
Is there a work around or is this use case itself so wrong? I strongly think if we build a framework that is more like a product the customer can integrate with, this flexibility of declaring any runtime dependency based on propertie should be there.
Thanks,
Paddy
This is not how it is done with Maven.
If, as in your case, you write a framework that may use different dependencies, then you do not somehow conditionally depend on the concrete implementation. This would not work, as the exact list of dependencies is constructed at build time (i.e. when the Maven artifact of you framework is built and installed).
Rather, there should be a special Maven artifact which describes just the interface of the functionality that you need. This artifact will typically contain the (Java) interfaces your framework needs; this is what your framework will depend on.
Then, when using your framework, a concrete implementation of these interfaces must be included - by the people using your framework, because only they know which implementation they use.
This is explained for example in "Maven by Example", chapter "7.10.1. Programming to Interface Projects".
Example:
JDBC: The interface is part of the JDK, so a framework that uses JDBC does not need to declare any special dependencies (if JDBC were not part of the JDK, you would depend on a Maven artifact like "jdbc-api" or similar). A software that actually uses JDBC will have to depend on whatever JDBC driver it actually uses (Oracle, HSQL etc.).