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 Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:51:43 GMT
well tomee don't really care but here we depend on
1) xbean (should be doable)
2) cxf

that's why i proposed to do next release with xbean 3 and then try to
upgrade all libs

wdyt? isnt it more pragmatic for short term releases (apache con would be
fantastic)?

*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*




2012/10/27 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>

> If ASM4 is providing functionality for java7 which the older version
> cannot provide then I see no reason to not work towards using ASM4 in TomEE
> as well. This should not be a blocker for OpenJPA but more some a point
> which we have to be aware of and need to handle some way.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@openjpa.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 2:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Upgrade to use ASM 4 for our post-enhancement
> processing
> >
> > Yep but it is not as easy as you say since thats internals and both will
> > not be tested IMO
> > Le 27 oct. 2012 01:57, "David Blevins" <david.blevins@gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> >>  Fork is not the right word.  Patch maybe, but even that can easily be
> >>  avoided.
> >>
> >>  If we had abstraction so there wasn't a hard dependency on
> > "ASM" we could
> >>  supply our own shaded version, that would be more than enough.
> >>
> >>  -David
> >>
> >>
> >>  On Oct 25, 2012, at 11:58 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>  > 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