I maintain findbugs, whose latest version needs jakarta-commons-lang 2.4. We currently ship 2.3. The upstream release notes [1][2] claim that 2.4 has no incompatibilities with 2.3. On the other hand, I see that jpackage (5.0) has both a jakarta-commons-lang (version 2.3) package and a jakarta-commons-lang24 package, but I don't know why.
According to repoquery, these packages currently require jakarta-commons-lang:
directory-naming eclipse-mylyn findbugs jakarta-commons-cli jakarta-commons-configuration jeuclid maven2 maven2-plugin-changes maven2-plugin-enforcer maven2-plugin-gpg maven2-plugin-jar maven2-plugin-javadoc openoffice.org-wiki-publisher plexus-registry
Do the maintainers of any of these packages have any reason why jakarta-commons-lang should not be upgraded from 2.3 to 2.4?
References: [1] http://commons.apache.org/lang/upgradeto2_4.html [2] http://commons.apache.org/lang/article2_4.html
* Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com [2009-09-10 12:28]:
eclipse-mylyn
[...]
Do the maintainers of any of these packages have any reason why jakarta-commons-lang should not be upgraded from 2.3 to 2.4?
I can enquire with upstream but I'm inclined to just see if it works :)
There were a lot of maven packages in there. We just finished a big upgrade to 2.0.8. I'd hate to see that broken by this but if we can patch or easily move to 2.0.9 (crazy) for F-12, I'm cool with that.
Andrew
I maintain findbugs, whose latest version needs jakarta-commons-lang 2.4. We currently ship 2.3. The upstream release notes [1][2] claim that 2.4 has no incompatibilities with 2.3. On the other hand, I see that jpackage (5.0) has both a jakarta-commons-lang (version 2.3) package and a jakarta-commons-lang24 package, but I don't know why.
According to repoquery, these packages currently require jakarta-commons-lang:
directory-naming eclipse-mylyn findbugs jakarta-commons-cli jakarta-commons-configuration jeuclid maven2 maven2-plugin-changes maven2-plugin-enforcer maven2-plugin-gpg maven2-plugin-jar maven2-plugin-javadoc openoffice.org-wiki-publisher plexus-registry
Do the maintainers of any of these packages have any reason why jakarta-commons-lang should not be upgraded from 2.3 to 2.4?
I really believe in apache commons developers being of the not so many Java developers that care about API :). Let's hope I'm not wrong, but if I'm I'll try to find the needed time for the fixes. According to me - Go for it. Findbugs deserve it :).
Regards, Alex
References: [1] http://commons.apache.org/lang/upgradeto2_4.html [2] http://commons.apache.org/lang/article2_4.html
Waaaaaaay back in September, I wrote:
I maintain findbugs, whose latest version needs jakarta-commons-lang 2.4. We currently ship 2.3. The upstream release notes [1][2] claim that 2.4 has no incompatibilities with 2.3. On the other hand, I see that jpackage (5.0) has both a jakarta-commons-lang (version 2.3) package and a jakarta-commons-lang24 package, but I don't know why.
Every once in awhile during the last few months, I've toyed with upgrading jakarta-commons-lang from 2.3 to 2.4. Unfortunately, Fedora is still missing multiple POMs needed to build with maven. Today, I figured that I didn't want to see yet another Fedora release go by with us still shipping version 2.3, so I updated (Rawhide only) and built with ant.
If anything breaks as a result of this, you now know at whom to hurl the rocks. Seriously, though, if there are any problems, please let me know and I will do my best to fix them.
On 3 February 2010 22:16, Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com wrote:
Every once in awhile during the last few months, I've toyed with upgrading jakarta-commons-lang from 2.3 to 2.4. Unfortunately, Fedora is still missing multiple POMs needed to build with maven. Today, I figured that I didn't want to see yet another Fedora release go by with us still shipping version 2.3, so I updated (Rawhide only) and built with ant.
If anything breaks as a result of this, you now know at whom to hurl the rocks. Seriously, though, if there are any problems, please let me know and I will do my best to fix them.
Which packages need the POMs? I've been going through adding those as needed and if that's all that's missing I can do a bunch more ...
MEF
On 3 February 2010 22:57, Mary Ellen Foster mefoster@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 February 2010 22:16, Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com wrote:
Every once in awhile during the last few months, I've toyed with upgrading jakarta-commons-lang from 2.3 to 2.4. Unfortunately, Fedora is still missing multiple POMs needed to build with maven. Today, I figured that I didn't want to see yet another Fedora release go by with us still shipping version 2.3, so I updated (Rawhide only) and built with ant.
Which packages need the POMs? I've been going through adding those as needed and if that's all that's missing I can do a bunch more ...
I just experimentally downloaded the 2.4 source tarball and as far as I can tell it built cleanly on my (F12) machine just using "mvn-jpp install". I think you could just probably build with maven without needing to use ant ...
MEF
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Mary Ellen Foster mefoster@gmail.com wrote:
I just experimentally downloaded the 2.4 source tarball and as far as I can tell it built cleanly on my (F12) machine just using "mvn-jpp install". I think you could just probably build with maven without needing to use ant ...
MEF
Hmmm. It appears that my problems stem from trying to build the documentation. That doesn't seem to happen with a bare "mvn package"; at least, target/apidocs contains only a META-INFO directory. I get this first:
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [INFO] The plugin 'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-xdoc-plugin' does not exist or no valid version could be found
I can work around that, I think, but then maven can't find xmlpull, which is needed by kxml. That's provided by xpp3, I think, but there is no depmap fragment saying so.
On the other hand, now that I look closer, the maven build punts to ant to do the actual building, so perhaps I shouldn't even be worrying about this.
On 9 February 2010 18:21, Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Mary Ellen Foster mefoster@gmail.com wrote:
I just experimentally downloaded the 2.4 source tarball and as far as I can tell it built cleanly on my (F12) machine just using "mvn-jpp install". I think you could just probably build with maven without needing to use ant ...
MEF
Hmmm. It appears that my problems stem from trying to build the documentation. That doesn't seem to happen with a bare "mvn package"; at least, target/apidocs contains only a META-INFO directory. I get this first:
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [INFO] The plugin 'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-xdoc-plugin' does not exist or no valid version could be found
I can work around that, I think, but then maven can't find xmlpull, which is needed by kxml. That's provided by xpp3, I think, but there is no depmap fragment saying so.
On the other hand, now that I look closer, the maven build punts to ant to do the actual building, so perhaps I shouldn't even be worrying about this.
Well, it would be nice to get the automatically generated OSGi manifest you get with the maven-based builds of jakarta commons products.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Mat Booth fedora@matbooth.co.uk wrote:
Well, it would be nice to get the automatically generated OSGi manifest you get with the maven-based builds of jakarta commons products.
True. Mary, do you want to fix xpp3 so it provide the appropriate depmap fragment, or should I file a bug?
Does anybody feel inspired about introducing the xdoc maven plugin to Fedora? (I don't. I changed jobs recently and no longer develop Java code. I've been wondering whether I should really be maintaining packages I no longer use, in fact. But I worked so hard and so long to get findbugs into Fedora that I hate to give it up.)
On 10 February 2010 16:25, Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Mat Booth fedora@matbooth.co.uk wrote:
Well, it would be nice to get the automatically generated OSGi manifest you get with the maven-based builds of jakarta commons products.
True. Mary, do you want to fix xpp3 so it provide the appropriate depmap fragment, or should I file a bug?
I'm willing to do that if necessary, but I'm still not seeing the build failure in commons-lang that you're seeing. I just downloaded commons-lang-2.4-src.tar.gz and successfully did "mvn-jpp install javadoc:javadoc" and nothing broke on my (F12) computer ... where is the maven build breaking for you?
MEF
On 3 February 2010 22:16, Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com wrote:
Waaaaaaay back in September, I wrote:
I maintain findbugs, whose latest version needs jakarta-commons-lang 2.4. We currently ship 2.3. The upstream release notes [1][2] claim that 2.4 has no incompatibilities with 2.3. On the other hand, I see that jpackage (5.0) has both a jakarta-commons-lang (version 2.3) package and a jakarta-commons-lang24 package, but I don't know why.
Every once in awhile during the last few months, I've toyed with upgrading jakarta-commons-lang from 2.3 to 2.4. Unfortunately, Fedora is still missing multiple POMs needed to build with maven.
Are there tickets raised for this?
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org