On Mon 23 Dec 2019 at 15:44, Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Furthermore, > > if we do not drop using that method, maven will throw an exception. Maven > will, not checkstyle. > > I do not think that should be happening (from a user perspective). > > It's an easy fix for maven. As soon as the checkstyle Plugin required > checkstyle 8.24 or higher, it the plugin should go to 4.x (new major > version). Simple as that. Let’s not bump any plugin to 4.x at this time. Better if we can hold that version number for plugins using Maven 4 as a baseline > > > I am even willing to implement a Checkstyle version check to explain the > incompatibilities of checkstyle 8.24 and above. It's not much work and will > be helpful to users. Seeing some error ("TreeeWalker does not allow the > subelement LineLength") is not helpful by itself. It's easy to document and > easy to detect. > > Also, why not ask the checkstyle team to adapt semantic versioning? Asking > doesn't cost anything afaik. > > > On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 15:35 Falko Modler, <f.mod...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > Hi Mark, > > > > > The maven-checkstyle-plugin is rather pretty much hardcoded to a > > specific checkstyle version. While you _could_ technically exchange the > > checkstyle dependency it is not really intended. > > > > > > Are you sure it is not really intended? It is actually _documented_: > > > > > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-checkstyle-plugin/examples/upgrading-checkstyle.html > > > > I've been using it this way for many years and I am sure many other > > users have done the same. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Falko > > > > > > Am 23.12.2019 um 12:57 schrieb Mark Struberg: > > > But the main purpose is not to have multiple frameworks run with it. > > That's the main difference to surefire. > > > > > > The maven-checkstyle-plugin is rather pretty much hardcoded to a > > specific checkstyle version. While you _could_ technically exchange the > > checkstyle dependency it is not really intended. > > > > > > The 'compatibility' layer is rather only important for the checkstyle > > configuration. That part should really remain stable. If not, we have to > up > > to major version. > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > > > >> Am 23.12.2019 um 12:34 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < > > rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > >> > > >> Point is it is the only way to not break end user since it gives us > the > > >> control of which version to select depending user config and java > > version. > > >> Which we dont ask any change to user im fine either ways though. > > >> > > >> Le lun. 23 déc. 2019 à 12:28, Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@gmail.com> a > > >> écrit : > > >> > > >>> I not think that would be a benefit, because removing the class > loader > > call > > >>> will also work with older versions of checkstyle. > > >>> Also, of the plugin is just a wrapper, why even bother to detect if > the > > >>> checkstyle.xml and checkstyle dependency will work together? > > >>> > > >>> Or am I missing something? > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 09:32 Romain Manni-Bucau, < > rmannibu...@gmail.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> What about loading checkstyle from a dependency resolver and use a > > custom > > >>>> classloader with an integration per version (a bit like surefire). > It > > >>>> enables to use any version and even detect an user override in > plugin > > >>> deps. > > >>>> Le lun. 23 déc. 2019 à 09:27, Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@gmail.com> > a > > >>>> écrit : > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi Enrico, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> that would mean a lot of incompatibilities which I wanted to avoid. > > >>>>> If the checkstyle jar is updated first (8.xx), maven users wouldn't > > be > > >>>> able > > >>>>> to use a current version for quite a while, because the Maven > plugin > > >>>> would > > >>>>> throw NoSuchMethodExceptions. I wanted to avoid this. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On the other hand, if the Maven plugin gets updated and released > > first, > > >>>>> there is more time for users to migrate to a more recent maven > > plugin. > > >>>>> Hence my PR. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I really do not see the benefit of updating the checkstyle jar > first > > >>> and > > >>>>> this having a period of time where Maven users cannot use a recent > > >>>> version > > >>>>> of checkstyle at all. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Maybe I did express the issue with checkstyle 8.24 in a wrong way. > > >>> Users > > >>>>> can already use it if they rewrite their checkstyle.xml. it's just > > that > > >>>> the > > >>>>> maven plugin should not update the default checkstyle version to > not > > >>>> break > > >>>>> any default setups and force users to rewrite their checks. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 08:45 Enrico Olivelli, <eolive...@gmail.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>> Ben, > > >>>>>> What about having a release of checkstyle with all of the > requested > > >>>>> changes > > >>>>>> and then update maven plugin and then release it? > > >>>>>> Checkstyle maven plugin is just a wrapper over checkstyle library. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The best way would be that you (or anyone from Checkstyle) create > a > > >>> PR > > >>>>> when > > >>>>>> you are ready with the new release. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I will be happy to help you move forward with this change and cut > a > > >>>>> release > > >>>>>> Cheers > > >>>>>> Enrico > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Il lun 23 dic 2019, 07:21 Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@gmail.com> > ha > > >>>>>> scritto: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The checkstyle team is waiting for my PR: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/maven-checkstyle-plugin/pull/18 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The problem is, that they want to remove a method. If they do > this > > >>>> too > > >>>>>>> early, maven users will not be able to update the checkstyle > > >>> version > > >>>>>>> anymore. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Also, the maven Checkstyle plugin cannot ship a Checkstyle > version > > >>>>> beyond > > >>>>>>> 8.23 because of breaking changes. There is also an issue for > this. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> This really needs some attention by someone with more > > >>> responsibility. > > >>>>>>> Please keep in mind that there is already a jira issue about the > > >>> 8.24 > > >>>>>>> incompability. I commented that they should have made it a major > > >>>>> version, > > >>>>>>> and maybe the checkstyle plugin will have to jump to a new major > > >>>>> release > > >>>>>> at > > >>>>>>> some point? > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Thanks for looking into this. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Ben > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > -- Sent from my phone