FWIW, I have found no difficulty moving code from lang2 to lang3. It's a breeze. I did a wholesale replacement of the package name and then fixed any compiler problems due to API differences.
Cheers, Paul On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:51 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 17 October 2014 21:37, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Each time you break an api extract this part in compatibility > (deprecated) > > n-1 jar and export new one in the v n jar. Grabbing pom dependecy you get > > by default n jars but if you want you can exclude include jars to get n-1 > > apis and moreover you didnt break anything for 80% of users. > > Moving deprecated classes to a separate jar is a very different issue. > That will work provided that the whole deprecated class is moved to > the compatibility jar. > A new class will need to be created for the new code. > In this case, there is no binary compatibility issue. > > In my earlier example, one would deprecate the Item class, and create > Item2, or change its package. > > But this can start to get quite messy quickly. > > > I know it is far from being perfect but lang, collections...are often > twice > > in apps. A maybe better alternative is to do smaller modules this way you > > get less impacted. > > Le 17 oct. 2014 22:21, "Duncan Jones" <djo...@apache.org> a écrit : > > > >> On 17 Oct 2014 21:11, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Yes, that what i said we were not impacted even if the stack is big. > >> > > >> > Once again in theory you are right but in practise that's boring and > >> > creates averhead for nothing. > >> > >> You're not making a lot of sense here. Sebb explained a problem with > your > >> approach, but your response is that he's right in theory, but that's > >> boring? > >> > >> I don't see how a multiple jar approach could work. Can you explain? > >> > >> Duncan > >> > >> > Le 17 oct. 2014 22:08, "sebb" <seb...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> > > >> > > On 17 October 2014 19:08, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > I did it twice or more. it is not magic but the goal is to put > >> > > > removed/changed classes outside the core project (yes it implies > some > >> > > > modules). this way the core part (what i call core here is what > >> > > > doesn't change) stays the same with same packages and only what > moves > >> > > > changes. > >> > > > >> > > I still don't get it. > >> > > > >> > > Suppose you have the following method in the Item class: > >> > > > >> > > public int getLength() > >> > > > >> > > You want to change it to > >> > > > >> > > public long getLength() > >> > > > >> > > This is not binary compatible. > >> > > > >> > > Suppose I move the int version into a legacy jar. > >> > > The long version is in the core jar. > >> > > Both are in the same class. > >> > > > >> > > Now assume that appA uses the int version, and appB has been updated > >> > > to use the long version. > >> > > > >> > > I don't see how one can make this work with Maven. > >> > > The JVM classloader can only load a single version of the Item > class. > >> > > > >> > > However appA needs one version, and appB needs the other. > >> > > > >> > > Note: I know that this can be made to work with OSGI (it uses > multiple > >> > > class-loaders) but that is a separate issue. > >> > > > >> > > > I know it is easier to just change everything but then you can't > cry > >> > > > cause the war does 200M to pring hello ;). > >> > > > > >> > > > Using maven pom dependencies can also make it smoother using the > pom > >> > > > dependency as an aggregator. > >> > > > > >> > > > it wouldn't be commons which is (are actually) everywhere I > wouldn't > >> > > > care that much but commons is so widely spread that it is a bit > >> harder > >> > > > to manage (it is comparable to asm if it speaks to anyone). > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > @rmannibucau > >> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > >> > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > >> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 2014-10-17 20:02 GMT+02:00 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: > >> > > >> On 10/17/14 6:57 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > >> > > >>> Well maven showed the opposite. And this is clearly a theory vs > >> > > practise > >> > > >>> topic so not sure it does worth allimenting this thread since > well > >> not > >> > > agree > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Top-posting this kind of statement does no good. If you have a > >> > > >> better approach, please describe it. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Phil > >> > > >>> Le 17 oct. 2014 15:52, "Matt Benson" <gudnabr...@gmail.com> a > >> écrit > >> : > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>>> It's not just the broken parts that your dependencies may be > >> using. > >> > > The > >> > > >>>> strategy Commons uses is the only way any of us know to permit > >> forward > >> > > >>>> movement while avoiding jar hell. > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> Matt > >> > > >>>> On Oct 17, 2014 8:35 AM, "Romain Manni-Bucau" < > >> rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >> > > >>>> wrote: > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>>> 2014-10-17 15:28 GMT+02:00 Benedikt Ritter < > brit...@apache.org>: > >> > > >>>>>> 2014-10-17 14:42 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> > > rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> 2014-10-17 13:52 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory < > >> garydgreg...@gmail.com > >> >: > >> > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> > > >>>>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>> 2014-10-17 12:23 GMT+02:00 Benedikt Ritter < > >> brit...@apache.org > >> >: > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2014-10-16 15:30 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> > > >>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com > >> > > >>>>>>>> : > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> <snip> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> In TomEE the stack uses [lang], then [lang3] was created > >> and > >> > > now > >> > > >>>>>>> TomEE > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> needs [lang] + [lang3] where actually it only needs > [lang] > >> > > >>>>> features, > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> ie suppose package didn't change then we wouldn't have > had > >> any > >> > > >>>>> issue. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> So it means you tend to import multiple versions of the > >> same > >> > > lib > >> > > >>>>> just > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> cause few parts were broken even if it doesn't affect > you. > >> > > >>>> That's > >> > > >>>>> a > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> bit sad IMO. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> If there is anything missing in lang3 that blocks you > from > >> > > >>>>> migrating > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> completely, can you tell us what that is? Maybe we can > fix > >> > > >>>> that... > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Issue is not in [commons] but in dependencies. The code we > >> own > >> > > >>>>>>>>> migrated but not all our deps. > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> I suggest you ask/Jira each dep to update their [lang] to > the > >> > > >>>> latest. > >> > > >>>>>>> That > >> > > >>>>>>>> has worked for me in the past with different FOSS projects > >> I've > >> > > made > >> > > >>>>> the > >> > > >>>>>>>> request about this and that libraries. > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Some projects will be receptive and at least reply to you > >> right > >> > > >>>> away, > >> > > >>>>>>>> others won't. Patches help of course since will require at > >> least > >> > > >>>>> import > >> > > >>>>>>>> changes. > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> yep, main issue ATM is some can't or doesn't maitain the > >> version we > >> > > >>>>>>> use - excepted for security issues (we are bound to a EE > >> version > >> > > for > >> > > >>>>>>> instance). It meanse it will be forgotten in few years but > it > >> also > >> > > >>>>>>> means we can get the same with [lang3] and [lang4] so > clearly > >> > > >>>>>>> something to tackle at [commons] level. We can't just ask > >> > > everybody to > >> > > >>>>>>> update each time IMHO. > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> The alternative is, that TomEE won't run at all because of > >> > > incompatible > >> > > >>>>> API > >> > > >>>>>> changes. I would vote for the lesser evil ;-) > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>> No, if broken part are provided in a -legacy.jar or a > >> > > >>>>> -compatibility.jar there would be no issue. > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Gary > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Benedikt > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~britter/ > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://github.com/britter > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> -- > >> > > >>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@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 > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> -- > >> > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~britter/ > >> > > >>>>>> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ > >> > > >>>>>> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter > >> > > >>>>>> http://github.com/britter > >> > > >>>>> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
