Uncouple the pom from http4s about rho

[arouel]

I agree and also using it that way. Would it be good to propose this in our README?

[bryce-anderson]

Oh for sure. We should also start keeping a changelog.

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:01 PM, André Rouél [email protected]
wrote:

I agree and also using it that way. Would it be good to propose this in
our README?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#44 (comment).

[rossabaker]

What does decoupling mean? You're still going to need a version to compile against, unless you're putting http4s-server into provided scope?

[bryce-anderson]

Yes, I believe that is the procedure.

[arouel]

So we would recommend users of Rho to manage http4s dependencies independently to pull in bugfix releases easily, right?

[bryce-anderson]

Yes, but they have to do this now anyway because they have to specify a backend unless they are just building an abstract rho service, then they will need to bring in http4s-server % "provided". So, for the most part, when a user specifies the http4s-blaze or http4s-servlet dependency they will need to run, http4s-server will be brought along for the ride.

The best part is getting the bugfixes for free, so long as we can keep them binary compatible.

[arouel]

agreed