openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Upgrade to use ASM 4 for our post-enhancement processing
Date Fri, 26 Oct 2012 06:58:04 GMT
If so tomee will fork openjpa to use xbean asm shade...

Tomee cares about size
Le 26 oct. 2012 00:23, "Kevin Sutter" <kwsutter@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi Mark,
> Yes, Romain raised this point to me on a separate thread.  From what I can
> tell TomEE is using OpenJPA 2.2.0.  Since your changes for openjpa-2171
> only went into trunk, I'm wondering where the dependency is being managed.
> So, yes, we do need some input from the TomEE team as to whether this type
> of change would affect them.
>
> Another alternative is to provide a shaded jar that embeds and hides the
> ASM deliverable within the OpenJPA jar.  Yes, that jar would grow slightly
> (46K), but then nobody would be wiser as to what version of ASM is being
> used.
>
> Anyway, let's keep the conversation going...  Thanks!
>
> Kevin
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
> > Hi Kevin!
> >
> > We must also make sure to not hit a major incompat with tomee and other
> > systems.
> > I'll ping David and Romain so they can test this a bit.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com>
> > > To: users@openjpa.apache.org; dev@openjpa.apache.org
> > > Cc:
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:15 PM
> > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Upgrade to use ASM 4 for our post-enhancement
> > processing
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > Some of you may have noticed a recent JIRA I opened up:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-2283
> > >
> > > I created this for upgrading our current usage of ASM 3.2 to ASM 4.0.
> > > OpenJPA uses ASM for some post-enhancement processing to clean up the
> > stack
> > > map tables that are required for Java 7 validation.  Since ASM 4 has
> more
> > > complete support for Java 7, I thought it would be an easy,
> > > preventative-care type of move.
> > >
> > > As my JIRA indicates, I have run into a couple of hiccups with this
> move
> > > that I am still working through.
> > >
> > > But, in general, does anybody have a concern with this upgrade?  I'm
> only
> > > looking to do trunk at the moment.  But, if we continue to hit Java 7
> > > validation errors in 2.2.x, then I might consider moving it back to
> 2.2.x
> > > as well.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any input,
> > > Kevin
> > >
> >
>

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