4 ms·
Huh. Most of the JVM shops I've worked at deploy apps as a monolithic fat .jar, built by their CI system, rather than trying to manage libraries on classpath.
by aphyr 13y ago
Huh. Most of the JVM shops I've worked at deploy apps as a monolithic fat .jar, built by their CI system, rather than trying to manage libraries on classpath.
- mh- 13y agoI think GP comment was referring to the JVM 'runtime'. which, to me, is less of a complication than the Python scenario. On that note, Python packaging/deployment/repeatability is still a disaster. If you have code with dependencies on compiled C extensions, there are few good ways to deal with this in prod. In summary, I think a lot of us find the idea of monolithic binaries appealing (perhaps even to an irrational degree, speaking for myself) because of issues suffered in the past. :)