You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@cayenne.apache.org by Borut Bolčina <bo...@gmail.com> on 2008/04/11 09:14:18 UTC
3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Andrus,
can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the commons.lang
library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
Thanks,
Borut
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Borut Bolčina <bo...@gmail.com>.
2008/4/11 Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>:
> Hi Borut,
>
> I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in the
> days of Maven.
LOL
Anyway, maven with controlled company repo does miracles here at our
company.
Cheers,
Borut
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Sometimes to get some rest from the daily routine, it helps to do a
dumb task that requires no thinking or creativity... so this is what I
just did... I took the Ashwood 1.1 code and created a new SVN project
on ObjectStyle.org out of it:
https://svn.objectstyle.org/repos/ashwood2/trunk/ashwood/
Then I removed commons-lang references and submitted a new build to
ibiblio. Once it gets posted, we can remove a few remaining commons-
lang references from Cayenne and get rid of that dependency.
Andrus
On Apr 11, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
> +1 to remove the dependency, because if the commons-lang upgrade has
> changed its API or behaviour, this may introduce issues with code
> dependent on 2.1
>
> regards Malcolm Edgar
>
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org
> > wrote:
>> Although ... this would require us to clean up Ashwood from
>> commons.lang
>> dep... Since Andriy doesn't seem to be coming back to Java, I may
>> actually
>> fork the Ashwood code and do a bit of tweaking to strip the parts
>> we are not
>> using for Cayenne and remove the commons-lang dep.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hmm... we only use a handful of classes from commons-lang...
>> ToStringBuilder, HashCodeBuilder, EqualsBuilder and a few more... I
>> think I
>> may simply pull them to "org.apache.cayenne.util" and drop the
>> dependency.
>> We'll end up with leaner Cayenne and fewer dependencies to manage.
>>>
>>> Andrus
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Borut,
>>>>
>>>> I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now
>>>> in the
>> days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of users,
>> upgrading too eagerly affects another...
>>>>
>>>> Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of
>>>> days,
>> and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea, I'll go
>> ahead
>> with it.
>>>>
>>>> Andrus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Andrus,
>>>>>
>>>>> can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
>> commons.lang
>>>>> library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Borut
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Malcolm Edgar <ma...@gmail.com>.
+1 to remove the dependency, because if the commons-lang upgrade has
changed its API or behaviour, this may introduce issues with code
dependent on 2.1
regards Malcolm Edgar
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> Although ... this would require us to clean up Ashwood from commons.lang
> dep... Since Andriy doesn't seem to be coming back to Java, I may actually
> fork the Ashwood code and do a bit of tweaking to strip the parts we are not
> using for Cayenne and remove the commons-lang dep.
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>
> > Hmm... we only use a handful of classes from commons-lang...
> ToStringBuilder, HashCodeBuilder, EqualsBuilder and a few more... I think I
> may simply pull them to "org.apache.cayenne.util" and drop the dependency.
> We'll end up with leaner Cayenne and fewer dependencies to manage.
> >
> > Andrus
> >
> >
> > On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Hi Borut,
> > >
> > > I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in the
> days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of users,
> upgrading too eagerly affects another...
> > >
> > > Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of days,
> and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea, I'll go ahead
> with it.
> > >
> > > Andrus
> > >
> > >
> > > On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrus,
> > > >
> > > > can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
> commons.lang
> > > > library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Borut
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Although ... this would require us to clean up Ashwood from
commons.lang dep... Since Andriy doesn't seem to be coming back to
Java, I may actually fork the Ashwood code and do a bit of tweaking to
strip the parts we are not using for Cayenne and remove the commons-
lang dep.
Andrus
On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Hmm... we only use a handful of classes from commons-lang...
> ToStringBuilder, HashCodeBuilder, EqualsBuilder and a few more... I
> think I may simply pull them to "org.apache.cayenne.util" and drop
> the dependency. We'll end up with leaner Cayenne and fewer
> dependencies to manage.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>> Hi Borut,
>>
>> I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in
>> the days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of
>> users, upgrading too eagerly affects another...
>>
>> Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of
>> days, and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea,
>> I'll go ahead with it.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
>>> Andrus,
>>>
>>> can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
>>> commons.lang
>>> library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Borut
>>
>>
>
>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Hmm... we only use a handful of classes from commons-lang...
ToStringBuilder, HashCodeBuilder, EqualsBuilder and a few more... I
think I may simply pull them to "org.apache.cayenne.util" and drop the
dependency. We'll end up with leaner Cayenne and fewer dependencies to
manage.
Andrus
On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Hi Borut,
>
> I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in
> the days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of
> users, upgrading too eagerly affects another...
>
> Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of
> days, and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea,
> I'll go ahead with it.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
>> Andrus,
>>
>> can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
>> commons.lang
>> library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Borut
>
>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
> I've already tested 3.1.5 extensively and it works great with Cayenne.
Just put it on ObjectStyle. As I uploaded the jars and created the POM
by hand, let me know if you have any trouble with it:
http://objectstyle.org/maven2/com/caucho/hessian/3.1.5/
Thanks
Andrus
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com>.
> Looks like the new Velocity 1.5 also depends on commons-lang. Doh!
The most of java open source projects depend on commons-lang :).
> http://velocity.apache.org/engine/releases/velocity-1.5/dependencies.html
>
> Wonder if there is an easy way to strip the template processing code and
> standard macros from everything else and include it in Cayenne. Then
> Cayenne classic will be fully self contained.
IMHO that would be too much work.
However, using IntelliJ's refactorings and code inspections, it would be pretty simple
to remove Velocity's commons-lang dependency.
Since Cayenne is an Apache project, I suppose you have commit rights too, so this remove could
be done pretty quickly in a branch.
AFAIK the next version of Velocity should also increase it's JDK requirement so even more
dependencies could be removed this way.
Ahmed.
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Looks like the new Velocity 1.5 also depends on commons-lang. Doh!
http://velocity.apache.org/engine/releases/velocity-1.5/dependencies.html
Wonder if there is an easy way to strip the template processing code
and standard macros from everything else and include it in Cayenne.
Then Cayenne classic will be fully self contained.
Andrus
On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:49 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
> Oh, I didn't know that.
>
> regards Malcolm Edgar
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org
> >
> wrote:
>
>> I am all for it, but isn't Velocity dependent on commons-collections?
>> (Velocity would be the last one standing, with SQLTemplate
>> depending on it,
>> I don't see how we can get rid of it).
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>> On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
>>> commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on
>>> application
>>> servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers
>>> shared
>>> libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style
>>> applications
>>> its a
>>> difficult thing for your customers to deal with.
>>>
>>> regards Malcolm Edgar
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <
>>> andrus@objectstyle.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
>>>> somewhere
>>>>
>>>>> (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get
>>>>> stung
>>>>> again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven
>>>>> repositories
>>>>> or not being updated when we want them?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-
>>>> collections
>>>> or
>>>> commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time,
>>>> and
>>>> not
>>>> removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
>>>> ObjectStyle.
>>>> I'll do that tonight.
>>>>
>>>> Andrus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Malcolm Edgar <ma...@gmail.com>.
Oh, I didn't know that.
regards Malcolm Edgar
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>
wrote:
> I am all for it, but isn't Velocity dependent on commons-collections?
> (Velocity would be the last one standing, with SQLTemplate depending on it,
> I don't see how we can get rid of it).
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
> >
> > On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
> > commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on
> > application
> > servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers
> > shared
> > libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style applications
> > its a
> > difficult thing for your customers to deal with.
> >
> > regards Malcolm Edgar
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <
> > andrus@objectstyle.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
> > > somewhere
> > >
> > > > (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get
> > > > stung
> > > > again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven
> > > > repositories
> > > > or not being updated when we want them?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-collections
> > > or
> > > commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time, and
> > > not
> > > removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
> > > ObjectStyle.
> > > I'll do that tonight.
> > >
> > > Andrus
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
I am all for it, but isn't Velocity dependent on commons-collections?
(Velocity would be the last one standing, with SQLTemplate depending
on it, I don't see how we can get rid of it).
Andrus
On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
> commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on
> application
> servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers
> shared
> libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style
> applications its a
> difficult thing for your customers to deal with.
>
> regards Malcolm Edgar
>
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org
> >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
>>
>> Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
>> somewhere
>>> (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get
>>> stung
>>> again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven
>>> repositories
>>> or not being updated when we want them?
>>>
>>
>> I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-
>> collections or
>> commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time,
>> and not
>> removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
>> ObjectStyle.
>> I'll do that tonight.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Malcolm Edgar <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hi Guys,
On a related issue is there an intention to break the dependency on
commons-collections. This is the JAR we have most issue with on application
servers. Its something we can deal with by patching the app servers shared
libraries, but when you are building "shrink wrap" style applications its a
difficult thing for your customers to deal with.
regards Malcolm Edgar
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>
wrote:
>
> On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
>
> Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository somewhere
> > (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we don't get stung
> > again by library versions we depend on being removed from maven repositories
> > or not being updated when we want them?
> >
>
> I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-collections or
> commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time, and not
> removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on ObjectStyle.
> I'll do that tonight.
>
> Andrus
>
>
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Apr 14, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
> Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
> somewhere (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we
> don't get stung again by library versions we depend on being removed
> from maven repositories or not being updated when we want them?
I wouldn't bother to put *all* deps (things like commons-collections
or commons-lang generally exist on the shared repo, posted on time,
and not removed), but Hessian is a special case. Yeah, let's put it on
ObjectStyle. I'll do that tonight.
Andrus
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Aristedes Maniatis <ar...@ish.com.au>.
I am also dead keen on upgrading the Hessian dependency to avoid some
bugs and improve performance, but we are stuck there since Maven
repositories are way behind with Hessian builds and the Caucho Hessian
people can't get them upgraded without a lot of work (all sorts of
voodoo with rsync is needed). I've already tested 3.1.5 extensively
and it works great with Cayenne. [1]
Is it worth us putting *all* the dependencies into a repository
somewhere (Objectstyle or Apache?) or directly into svn so that we
don't get stung again by library versions we depend on being removed
from maven repositories or not being updated when we want them?
Ari
[1] http://hessian.caucho.com/#Java
On 11/04/2008, at 5:20 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Hi Borut,
>
> I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in
> the days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of
> users, upgrading too eagerly affects another...
>
> Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of
> days, and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea,
> I'll go ahead with it.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
>> Andrus,
>>
>> can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
>> commons.lang
>> library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Borut
>
-------------------------->
ish
http://www.ish.com.au
Level 1, 30 Wilson Street Newtown 2042 Australia
phone +61 2 9550 5001 fax +61 2 9550 4001
GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
Re: 3.0M3 dependency to commons lang
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Hi Borut,
I wish we didn't have any dependencies at all :-) Especially now in
the days of Maven. Lagging with deps upgrade affects one group of
users, upgrading too eagerly affects another...
Anyways, I am +1 in general. I'll let it sit here for a couple of
days, and if nobody tells us why such upgrade is a horrible idea, I'll
go ahead with it.
Andrus
On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Borut Bolčina wrote:
> Andrus,
>
> can you please upgrade version in the cayenne 3.0M3 pom of the
> commons.lang
> library to 2.4. Cayenne depends on 2.1 version of this library.
>
> Thanks,
> Borut