On 17 October 2014 21:57, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote: > 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.
Which is why we do it that way, rather than renaming individual classes. > > 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 >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
