:) as usual with asm, looks ok but breaks several apps ;). But main point is: do we want to export as asm6 the real asm7 and fake the runtime it will work? If we want a smooth upgrade we can update asm6 module to have some of changes but keep asm7 module to ensure we cover it IMHO.
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 16:03, Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com> a écrit : > FYI, here's a diff of the API > > https://gist.github.com/rotty3000/a68c8ea494f4c1b2e304822dc8a72a66 > > It doesn't look that scary tbh. Only couple methods changed which were > already marked experimental and just normalized into the regular API, same > for a couple of constants, and one other method removed and exploded into 3. > > Hope this helps, > - Ray > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 9:39 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> @Raymond: no worries -> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/trunk/xbean-asm7-shaded/ >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >> >> >> Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 15:37, Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com> a >> écrit : >> >>> Sorry for the newbie interruption. But can someone point me to the >>> relevant code/project/module in Geronimo that has this asm integration? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> - Ray >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:30 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 14:26, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> a >>>> écrit : >>>> >>>>> Introducing our own API doesn't make much sense to me. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Agree cause it is not just an xbean internal >>>> >>>> >>>>> The challenges (support for new unknown Java versions) would be >>>>> exactly the same as ASM has. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It wouldn't if we would be in asm scope cause we would use a very >>>> limited set of asm features. We are kind in a situation where we use 10% of >>>> the features and expose 100% by construction :(. >>>> >>>> >>>>> So we would in the end also be forced to break the API :( >>>>> Remember that the main reason we created the whole shading for is to >>>>> allow to upgrade parts of the stack without interfering with a.) some >>>>> custom apps and b.) each other. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Agree. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Right now you can just swap out openjpa in TomEE for example. All you >>>>> need to do is to _potentially_ also add another xbean-asm version. >>>>> And that is good that way imo. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ok so you confirm keeping the pattern we use (ie going with asm7) is ok >>>> for you? >>>> >>>> FYI the diff: >>>> https://gitlab.ow2.org/asm/asm/compare/ASM_6_2_1...ASM_7_0_BETA >>>> But some impl changes are not just fixes and even if signatures don't >>>> always change I think it is sane to not put a v7 in an asm6 package/module >>>> - same as for java 8 upgrade where the verifier was stricter. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> LieGrue, >>>>> strub >>>>> >>>>> > Am 01.10.2018 um 14:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < >>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>: >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 12:39, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> a >>>>> écrit : >>>>> > We should analyse if ASM7 is a drop-in replacement and can be used >>>>> in a backward compatible way. >>>>> > >>>>> > Didn't review everything but there are some changes in the impl >>>>> which are not compatible and why we must upgrade even if asm 6.2.1 had >>>>> some >>>>> good java 11 support. >>>>> > >>>>> > If so, then we could keep the shaded o.a.g.asm6 package and just >>>>> document it. >>>>> > >>>>> > I thought about it but it sounds so dangerous and hard to control on >>>>> the long run than upgrading all our stack sounds worth it for me. >>>>> > >>>>> > If ASM7 removed some old methods, then we really should also shade >>>>> to a private asm7 package. >>>>> > >>>>> > This lead to the option to not expose ASM at all and create our own >>>>> API but it breaks the reason why all our stack uses this shade: have a >>>>> fully featured ASM usable by proxying impl of the full stack >>>>> > and share it with the scanner. This is why I thought we can't really >>>>> fake the package without serious risk, we expose a too big coverage now >>>>> (cxf, openjpa, xbean, big data engines, user apps, ...). >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > LieGrue, >>>>> > strub >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > Am 30.09.2018 um 19:44 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < >>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>: >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Hi guys, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Asm 7 beta was released yesterday, I'd like to try to release it >>>>> ASAP. >>>>> > > I see 1 main point to discuss before releasing: do we keep the >>>>> version in the package and module name? For now it is required cause we >>>>> cant guarantee anything about asm compatibility. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Options I see are: >>>>> > > 1. drop asm and use bcel (which is asf) >>>>> > > 2. drop asm and reimplement bytecode parsing for our need (but >>>>> will create issue in most of our stack for proxy creation IMHO) >>>>> > > 3. keep it like that >>>>> > > 4. use an "asm.*" package crossing fingers >>>>> > > >>>>> > > I'd love 4 but I fear it can create issue quickly when I see what >>>>> java is becoming so, personally, i think 3 is safe but since we are at >>>>> "that" moment I'd like to get your feedback. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Side note: if I get no other vote than 3 before tuesday, i'll try >>>>> to launch the release on tuesday with asm7 module and package to let us >>>>> get >>>>> it out. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>> > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> >>> (@rotty3000) >>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com> >>> (@Liferay) >>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> >>> (@OSGiAlliance) >>> >> > > -- > *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> > (@rotty3000) > Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com> > (@Liferay) > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> > (@OSGiAlliance) >
