Re: [xmlblaster] ProGuard

[Michele <laghi at swissinfo.org>]

Hi Nelson,

inEvo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been able to create the jar.. still the xmlBlasterClient.jar is not 
> included in the produced jar... i'll look into that later...
> I've also built  the lightest client possible (without support for 
> almost any protocol) and it's still ver 3 M!
>
> Could some of those who experimented with Ofuscators like ProGuard share 
> their experiences and results?

I haven't done it myself (I am not a big fan of proguard). I know you 
have to do some work in explicitly specifiying the classes which are 
loaded by reflection and the classes which are not used in the library 
itself. This probably involves a lot of trial/error.

Basically you could go two ways: Either you strip down the library or 
otherwise you strip down the library together with your application. The 
benefit of choosing the second approach is that you don't need to take 
care about classes not used by just your application (and therefore 
reducing the size even more).
> Why does the final jar keep the demo apps? Do we have to trim the jar 
> done ourselves?
Again I believe this was not stripped down to a minimum. Of course you 
could do it more restrictively.


> I'm sorry for asking so many questions but i have to port an application 
> which used .NEt WebServices and Remoting .. and convincing the people 
> involved to use an OpenSource Project like XmlBlaster for messaging 
> purposes is not an easy task ;)

I think one of the tasks we also need to acheave is to more cleanly 
separate the packages used by the serverside from these used in the 
client side.

This involves some cleanup work, particularly in the utility packages 
and in the socket protocol (where there are some interesting parsing 
classes which could be used elsewhere too).


> regards,
> Nelson Silva