Mike, Do you manually run the compliance checker on each JAR or do you have a script? If you have a script, please share and I’ll put it on the wiki.
-Jordan On May 7, 2015 at 6:31:50 PM, Mike Drob ([email protected]) wrote: I'm using the java-api-compatibility-checker [1] I think I ran into a bug with it, so I had to run using Java 7 instead of Java 8, but that probably does not affect the results. At a minimum, it should be possible to convert JsonNode -> String -> (other) JsonNode, for both directions. I'm not sure that is desirable when the stated intent was for performance reasons, though. [1] https://github.com/lvc/japi-compliance-checker/ On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Cameron McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote: > Good pickup Mike, > What is the tool that you're using to detect this incompatibilities? It > would be good for someone to run it on pull requests prior to them being > merged to the master branch. > > I'm not familiar with the x-discovery stuff, so I can't really comment on > whether there's a way of doing the change without breaking compatibility. > Is it possible to create a org.codehaus.jackson.JsonNode from a > com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonNode? > Not easily I imagine. > > I agree though that we should be moving this to 3.0.0 if we cannot make the > change without breaking compatibility. > cheers > > > > On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote: > > > -1 non-binding > > > > We break backward compatibility in this release. Here are reports run via > > the java-api-compliance-checker: > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~mdrob/curator-2.8.0/x-discovery-server-back.html > > http://people.apache.org/~mdrob/curator-2.8.0/x-rpc-back.html > > > > The rest of the modules came up clean. > > > > The changes in the discovery server came from CURATOR-186. User code with > > references to DiscoveryContext is going to end up broken at both the > source > > and binary levels. > > > > I think the rpc changes are all a result of the same JIRA removing the > > jackson dependency. > > > > To address this, we can revert this change, and re-apply it for the 3.0 > > release. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Ashish <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > Ran the build and test cases, work good > > > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > This is the vote for Apache Curator version 2.8.0 > > > > > > > > *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours > > > > > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are > > > > provided for convenience. > > > > > > > > Link to release notes: > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12329300 > > > > > > > > > Staging repo: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.8.0 > > > > > > > > Binary artifacts: > > > > > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1011/ > > > > > > > > The tag to be voted upon: > > > > > > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=22a045c39e08f10273b057c384c62db2337edac8 > > > > > > > > > Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release: > > > > http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 approve > > > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > thanks > > > ashish > > > > > > Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog > > > My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal > > > > > >
