[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-14117?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17521947#comment-17521947
 ] 

Liam Miller-Cushon commented on BEAM-14117:
-------------------------------------------

Some notes from the thread:

bytebuddy (and ASM, which it depends on) aim to keep their APIs stable:

* https://lists.apache.org/thread/qj5vhw98owkb61bofpz6z34zbjsp3sh5
* https://lists.apache.org/thread/80wwxmv1totwx5y84w4jzqsh904k8d03

Initial testing doesn't show any regressions, and an analysis of the output of 
`./gradlew dependencyReport` also looks good: 
https://lists.apache.org/thread/hb8t2wb6j7oyry70ykchr4yjvmgzyrzw

> Unvendor bytebuddy dependency
> -----------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-14117
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-14117
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: sdk-java-core
>            Reporter: Liam Miller-Cushon
>            Priority: P2
>
> Vendoring the bytebuddy dep was introduced in 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1019:
> {quote}We encountered backward incompatible changes in bytebuddy during 
> upgrading to Mockito 2.0.
> Shading bytebuddy helps to address them and future issues.
> {quote}
> This makes it harder to upgrade the bytebuddy version (e.g. 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-14065, 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-12241).
> Vendoring or shading bytebuddy is discouraged by the upstream owners of the 
> library, see e.g. [https://github.com/assertj/assertj-core/issues/2470] where 
> assertj was migrated off a shaded version:
> {quote}As Byte Buddy retains compatibility, not shading the library would 
> allow running recent JVMs without an update of assertj but only BB. Other 
> libraries like Mockito or Hibernate do not shade BB and there are no known 
> issues with this approach. In case of an error, stack traces would also be 
> easier to process as break points remain intact.
> {quote}
> Does anyone remember additional context about the issues encountered during 
> the mockito 2.0 upgrade? Would there be any interest in trying to unvendor 
> bytebuddy? I'm happy to help route issues to the upstream bytebuddy and 
> mockito projects, in general I think they want to support making it possible 
> to use bytebuddy without shading it.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

Reply via email to