Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACZkXPyBGtc33AyggEMaBUVUcLLNyZdJvxTVzWQOeCAWf-kzEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <535A395E.6090303@apache.org>
	<CAEQx=xk88r+VExwWSppBd7V6vc+vaD0xKnPn0VRHnV5GMtC81A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACZkXPyBGtc33AyggEMaBUVUcLLNyZdJvxTVzWQOeCAWf-kzEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:07:16 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAB917RKc=gUkLn8ZJNhigBz7PnOdG4_veWk7i1jZu_vvfg0poQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bcel] Next release
From: Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6ba701fdc6004f7dda5f2

--047d7bd6ba701fdc6004f7dda5f2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I'm not sure we should rush this... this my be the way to jar hell. But I'm
not using BCEL in my projects so I can not really tell if it's a problem.


2014-04-25 14:57 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>:

> Either version # is fine with me.
>
> Gary
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Torsten Curdt <tcurdt@vafer.org> wrote:
>
> > Go go go! Thanks for looking into this :)
> >
> > IIRC there is so much stuff fixed and changed from 5.2 - I think
> > calling it 6.0 expresses this better than 5.3.
> > Especially with the changes to the visitor interface.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Torsten
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm currently working on the migration to Java 8 in Debian and several
> > > packages are broken due to the lack of invokedynamic support in BCEL
> 5.2
> > > (the dreaded ClassFormatException: Invalid byte tag in constant pool:
> > > 18). I think it's high time for a release. Even if the current code
> > > isn't perfect it's far better than BCEL 5.2 (there are ~60 issues fixed
> > > in JIRA).
> > >
> > > The code on the trunk isn't fully compatible with the previous release
> > > due to the addition of methods to the Visitor interface. By Commons
> > > standards we would usually change the package, however I think it's
> safe
> > > to keep the org.apache.bcel package as is. The Visitor interface is
> > > never implemented directly, I have found that projects always extend
> the
> > > EmptyVisitor class instead. I've rebuilt several projects using BCEL
> > > (ant, ant-contrib, clirr, clirr-maven-plugin, ha-jdbc, jbossas, jibx,
> > > mx4j, xalan, maven-shared-jar, robocode) and they all worked fine with
> > > the current snapshot.
> > >
> > > The code on the trunk is numbered 6.0, are we ok with that or should we
> > > use 5.3 for the next release?
> > >
> > > Emmanuel Bourg
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<
> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>


-- 
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter

--047d7bd6ba701fdc6004f7dda5f2--