CODEWITHSUNDEEP
liferayliferay-6
wikimix
wikimix

Reputation: 467

PropsValues in liferay

why we should not use any classes from portal-impl.jar inside your portlet?

In my case, how can I read PropsValues without adding portal-impl to maven dependencies.

I'm using Liferay 6.2

Thanks

Upvotes: 1

Views: 873

Answers (1)

Olaf Kock
Olaf Kock

Reputation: 48057

@Origineil - in a comment to your question - gave you the alternative of what to do instead of using portal-impl.jar (e.g. use GetterUtil.getBoolean(PropsUtil.get(PropsKeys.SESSION_TIMEOUT_AUTO_EXTEND)); instead of PropsValues.SESSION_TIMEOUT_AUTO_EXTEND.

Why shouldn't you add portal-impl.jar to your project? Well, there are many reasons. First of all: It doesn't work. If you add portal-impl.jar to your plugin, there are quite a lot of spring components in there that would re-initialize - and they'd assume they're in the portal context. They'll be missing other code they're dependent on and you'd basically pull in a lot of Liferay's implementation and dependency code, making your plugin ridiculously big. And the initialization can't be done twice, so it won't even work anyways.

Plus, in portal-impl.jar you'll only find Liferay's implementation details - none of this code is ever promised to be stable. Not only will nobody care if you're depending on it, it'll most likely break your assumptions even on minor upgrades. Of course some components in there are more stable then others, but the basic assumption is a good one.

Liferay's API (that you're encouraged to use) lives in portal-service.jar. This is automatically available to all plugins and it contains the implementation mentioned above. Don't depend on someone's (Liferay's) internal implementation. Rather depend on the published API. If this means that you'll have to implement something again - so be it. It might be slightly less elegant, but a lot more future proof. And if you compare the size of portal-impl.jar to the amount of code that you'd duplicate in the case of PropsValues, you'll see that this single expansion is actually a nobrainer. Don't pull in 30M of code just because you'd rather type 30 characters than 60.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions