nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

Some dependencies missing in 5.11...why?

npasquetto

Hi, we have notice that some dependencies are missing in the rest webapp in the 5.11 distribution package. Some examples are SLF4j and groovy.
This could be a big problem if someone has designed a process with a groovy script, for example.

Why these dependencies have been removed?

Thank You!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

trademak

Hi,

The SLF4j dependency was not part of Activiti for the 5.11 release. Groovy is an optional dependency, but this could be added to the REST webapp (you can create a JIRA for this).
Do it's not a matter of removing dependencies, but just adding them explicitly.

Best regards,

npasquetto

Hi, thanks for the reply!

Hi,

The SLF4j dependency was not part of Activiti for the 5.11 release. Groovy is an optional dependency, but this could be added to the REST webapp (you can create a JIRA for this).
Do it's not a matter of removing dependencies, but just adding them explicitly.

Best regards,

I think this could be a problem after an upgrade of the product if, for example, someone have used SLF4j in a JavaDelegate class or a groovy script in the BPMN process. But this could be a general problem, for all libraries and not only for SLF4j or groovy. For these reasons I have a question: there is a policy for the provided libraries in the rest and explorer webapps?

I see them like 2 environments where I expect to find , for my processes, the same situation. Couldn't be an idea to provide a well documented list of the libraries to include in the same context of the activiti-core library? In this way someone could find his best way to provide the dependency (eg: a common loader folder in tomcat for all the webapps, in the WEB-INF for a custom webapp, …).

jbarrez

That's pretty easy, see http://activiti.org/userguide/index.html#getting.started.including.libs

If you want to generate it yourself, clone the Activiti source and run 'mvn dependency:tree'.
That will give you all dependencies and mark the required and optional ones.

npasquetto

Hi Joram, thank you, good advice.

That's pretty easy, see http://activiti.org/userguide/index.html#getting.started.including.libs

If you want to generate it yourself, clone the Activiti source and run 'mvn dependency:tree'.
That will give you all dependencies and mark the required and optional ones.

But the web apps (rest and explorer) is yet delivered with activiti core and part of his own dependencies, so it's difficoult to understand the correct way to deploy them.

jbarrez

But the web apps (rest and explorer) is yet delivered with activiti core and part of his own dependencies, so it's difficoult to understand the correct way to deploy them.

That is true. If you'd want to know that, you need to do the same as above. But now go to the specific module (eg activiti-rest) and do a 'mvn dependency:tree'. But it is a valid point. I'll add a similar section to the userguide for the webapps.

npasquetto

Thank you Joram.

But it is a valid point. I'll add a similar section to the userguide for the webapps.

From my point of view, if REST would be an interface for the engine, it's important that it is fully functional out of-the-box, without any manual customization after the deployment and should be compatible with old versions…isn't the correct approach for you?

PS I work with an activiti in standalone mode

jbarrez

From my point of view, if REST would be an interface for the engine, it's important that it is fully functional out of-the-box, without any manual customization after the deployment

Correct.

and should be compatible with old versions

Yes, that is correct. As such, it should be a black box.
I don't yet see the argument of slf4j though. If it is a dependency of the rest war, what is the issue (besides classloading issues).

npasquetto

I don't yet see the argument of slf4j though. If it is a dependency of the rest war, what is the issue (besides classloading issues).

I'm sorry but i don't understand: if your is a question, in my case, the only problem is in classloading.

jbarrez

Well, could you elaborate a bit more on the classloading issue?