Yup, that's correct. And yeah #3 is optional which is why I said "may".
On 11/09/2011 02:38 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote: > Thanks David! > > Just to make sure I understand. Doing the steps above will allow the > built artifact to run in either AS 7.0 or 7.1. Correct? > > I thought we had said on IRC that Hibernate could really get away with > (1) and (2) and that JBoss AS 7.0 could specify to use JBoss Logging 3.0 > via dep-mgmt in its pom(s) rather than allowing Hibernate (or others) to > pull in Logging 3.1. > > On Wed 09 Nov 2011 02:32:11 PM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote: >> OK folks. I've pushed out jboss-logging 3.1.0.CR1 and >> jboss-logging-tools 1.0.0.CR4. >> >> Here's what you need to do. >> >> 0. Update your dep versions (obviously) >> 1. Add the following switch to your annotation processing step (or to >> javac if it's combined): -AloggingVersion=3.0 >> 2. Build your artifacts against jboss-logging 3.1.0.CR1. >> 3. When you publish the POMs for artifacts built this way, you may >> specify jboss-logging 3.0.0.GA as the required version, and it will be >> compatible with such. >> >> Basically what you're doing with the -AloggingVersion=3.0 flag is >> generating larger classes in exchange for backwards compatibility. If >> you develop other frameworks which are not expected to be supported on >> AS 7.0 (for example), you do not need this flag (logging version 3.1 >> is required in this case). >> >> If this doesn't solve your issues please let me know right away. >> >> On 11/09/2011 08:47 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote: >>> Yeah, the problem was that to *implement* BasicLogger we had switched to >>> using a base class (bundled in 3.1) to implement the multitude of >>> methods, due to problems associated with generating all the >>> implementations in every class. >>> >>> On 11/09/2011 08:39 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote: >>>> Ok, I am totally confused then. I thought this was a discussion about >>>> BasicLogger. But we have been using that afaik way before our recent >>>> upgrade to 3.1 >>>> >>>> On Wed 09 Nov 2011 08:23:33 AM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote: >>>>> On 11/09/2011 08:22 AM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:00:07 +0100, Steve Ebersole >>>>>> <st...@hibernate.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe instead of "shading in" the removed class you could just >>>>>>> add it >>>>>>> back to the JBoss Logging codebase? >>>>>> >>>>>> Right, why can we not do that? >>>>> >>>>> You have it backwards. We didn't *remove* a class, we *added* one - >>>>> which makes it not present in 3.0.x. >>>>> >>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 04:48 AM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >>>>>>>> I see a few outputs >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - JBoss Logging 3.1.0.Final is released in the next 24h and we >>>>>>>> use it >>>>>>>> in Core and Search >>>>>> >>>>>> What's stopping a 3.1.0.Final release? >>>>> >>>>> Trying to resolve this issue for you guys. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- - DML _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
