camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: spi-annotations
Date Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:42:58 GMT
Sounds good. I will give it another try with Java 7 and make sure
appropriate profiles get enabled.

Thanks Babak!

On Saturday, August 17, 2013, Babak Vahdat wrote:

> Aha now I see, well if you make use of Java 7 and IntelliJ can't handle
> this
> then that sounds like a IntelliJ bug to me because in that case the apt
> profile IS enabled and IntelliJ should take the apt module dependency into
> account like any other POM dependencies. There was also a user reporting
> the
> same problem with IntelliJ. Using the maven-idea-plugin instead of
> IntelliJ's own "import" functionality solved the problem for him:
>
>
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/About-the-spi-annotations-dependency-tp5736873p5737084.html
>
> And that's also what we've got on the Wiki as well:
>
> http://camel.apache.org/building.html#Building-UsinganIDE
>
> That all said I think by making this dependency as optional, James original
> idea was to NOT bump this dependency transitively to the POM of all those
> Camel component, data format writers out there as the usage of this new
> feature should be understood as "optional" so people should not get that
> transitively but explicitly through their own POMs:
>
> http://camel.apache.org/endpoint-annotations.html
>
> I hope James will comment on this thread if I'm wrong :)
>
> Babak
>
>
> ceposta wrote
> > Very interesting. That sounds like lots of headaches, so keeping optional
> > is fine if it solves that.
> > I was just noticing in Intellij that it couldn't compile camel-sql
> because
> > it didn't bring in that dependency since it was marked optional. But
> > that's
> > an easy headache to fix compared to the ones you mention :)
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Babak Vahdat
> > &lt;
>
> > babak.vahdat@
>
> > &gt;wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Christian,
> >>
> >> I think having the optional flag set to true is indeed good as we used
> to
> >> have problems to build & run the tests using Java 6 profile on the
> >> CI-Server, e.g. the profile "Camel.trunk.fulltest". See also here:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/camel/blob/master/components/pom.xml#L221
> >>
> >> Also note that the apt module by itself brings a transitive dependency
> to
> >> spi-annotations:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/camel/blob/master/tooling/apt/pom.xml#L43
> >>
> >> So I guess removing that optional flag would cause the same problems
> >> again,
> >> see also this thread:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Our-builds-looks-really-bad-tp5731673p5731743.html
> >>
> >> There's also another ODD issue we're facing with our Jenkins builds but
> >> unfortunately it's still not resolved, causing a lot of yellow/red
> >> bubbles
> >> by our profiles as well as other Apache projects:
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6218
> >>
> >> Which is another story...
> >>
> >> Babak
> >>
> >>
> >> ceposta wrote
> >> > Apply this for the fix :)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/camel-core/pom.xml b/camel-core/pom.xml
> >> > index cd2f201..7409c90 100755
> >> > --- a/camel-core/pom.xml
> >> > +++ b/camel-core/pom.xml
> >> > @@ -99,7 +99,6 @@
> >> >
> >> >
> > <groupId>
> >> > org.apache.camel
> >> >
> > </groupId>
> >> >
> >> >
> > <artifactId>
> >> > spi-annotations
> >> >
> > </artifactId>
> >> >
> >> >
> > <version>
> >> > ${project.version}
> >> >
> > </version>
> >> > -
> >> >
> > <optional>
> >> > true
> >> >
> > </optional>
> >> >
> >> >
> > </dependency>
> >> >
> >> >
> > <dependency>
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Christian Posta
> >> > &lt;
> >>
> >> > christian.posta@
> >>
> >> > &gt;wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> So in camel-core, the spi-annotations dependency is marked "optional"
> >> in
> >> >> the pom.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> > <dependency>
> >> >>
> >> >
> > <groupId>
> >> > org.apache.camel
> >> >
> > </groupId>
> >> >>
> >> >
> > <artifactId>
> >> > spi-annotations
> >> >
> > </artifactId>
> >> >>
> >> >
> > <version>
> >> > ${project.version}
> >> >
> > </version>
> >> >>
> >> >
> > <optional>
> >> > true
> >> >
> > </optional>
> >> >>
> >> >
> > </dependency>
> >> >>
> >> >> But is it optional? Seems to be used in some of the core components,
> >> so
> >> >> should be there, right?
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> *Christian Posta*
> >> >> http://www.christianposta.com/blog
> >> >> twitter: @christianposta
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *Christian Posta*
> >> > http://www.christianposta.com/blog
> >> > twitter: @christianposta
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:View this message in context:
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/spi-annotations-tp5737435p5737457.html
> Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


-- 
*Christian Posta*
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
twitter: @christianposta

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message