Move public onto JDK 1.5? (was Re: Brutus going down)

["Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@apache.org>]

Leo wrote:

> It is likely that there won't be any e-mail sent out by gump for a few
days.
>
> It is likely that the non-standard workspaces (kaffe, testing and jdk15)
> will be offline for quite a while.

Does it make sense to move public (with nagging) to JDK 1.5? Given that we
can't support all configurations, and given the level of turmoil the JAXP
1.3 seems to be causing, ought we not just dive in w/ both feet & embrace
change? It isn't as if folks run the jars that Gump generates, this is just
about early detection of compatibility issues.

Since (I believe) JDK ought be compile compatible w/ older JDKs, with the
exception of some new keyword stumbled (e.g. enum), and since I doubt as
many folks pay attention to Gump runs as they do Gump nags, ought  not give
as much notice as poissible?

Seems relatively healthy, and not too painful. That said, I'm not expert,
I'm just asking a question.

regards

Adam


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org

Re: Move public onto JDK 1.5? (was Re: Brutus going down)

[Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>]

Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
> Leo wrote:
> 
> 
>>It is likely that there won't be any e-mail sent out by gump for a few
> 
> days.
> 
>>It is likely that the non-standard workspaces (kaffe, testing and jdk15)
>>will be offline for quite a while.
> 
> 
> Does it make sense to move public (with nagging) to JDK 1.5?

-1, macosx still doesn't have 1.5 stable.

-- 
Stefano.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org

Re: Move public onto JDK 1.5?

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On Mon, 23 May 2005, Adam R. B. Jack <aj...@apache.org> wrote:

>> I find this time quite interesting since we see projects embrace
>> JAXP 1.3 and in particular DOM3 at very different paces.
> 
> Yeah, in fact, I think it is one of the biggest deals in my memory
> of Gump.

You haven't been around for the 1.3 -> 1.4 transition 8-)

JDBC 3.0 or the fact that the JDK ships with JCE and JAXP have been
interesting as well.

> It has started to make me realize that the 'events' such as this,
> big discontinuities/big disruptions, are truely newsworthy ... and
> perhaps ought be publicized.

True.  But at the same time you cannot avoid them if you want to
evolve interfaces.

> I know you blogged about this Stefan [1], but I wonder if we ought
> have brought it up to the ASF board, and if the ASF board ought
> consider taking action based of the findings.

board would have been the wrong place for this.  Our JCP rep may have
been a better choice, but I don't think it would have changed
anything.

I don't see any way how JAXP could have embraced DOM3 without breaking
existing implementations of some interfaces.  Sure, they could have
used abstract classes instead of interfaces in the first place.

> Who knows, maybe Sun would respond to ASF highlighting a bunch of
> discontinuities. Maybe a dialogue ought occur.

If we want to do that, what we really need is Gump running on Mustang
nightlies.

> I figured a few nags might cause a few "enums" to be renamed, and
> add some value speeding up the conversion.

I already tried for Jakarta Commons and Dims committed all my patches.
There have been others, but most projects have been non-ASF projects
some of which looked stalled.

And then we had a few Maven built projects that needed to adapt to
make javac happy (specifying -target 1.1 but not setting -source at
all).  For Ant builds we've fixed them (i.e. Ant "fixes" javac's new
default for -source) with a change in Ant that went into 1.6.3.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org

Re: Move public onto JDK 1.5?

["Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@apache.org>]

> On Sun, 22 May 2005, Adam R. B. Jack <aj...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Does it make sense to move public (with nagging) to JDK 1.5?
>
> Not yet, IMHO.
>

Ok. I just didn't want us to give up on all the Gump flavours w/o having
asked the question.

> > Given that we can't support all configurations, and given the level
> > of turmoil the JAXP 1.3 seems to be causing, ought we not just dive
> > in w/ both feet & embrace change?
>
> I find this time quite interesting since we see projects embrace JAXP
> 1.3 and in particular DOM3 at very different paces.

Yeah, in fact, I think it is one of the biggest deals in my memory of Gump.
It has started to make me realize that the 'events' such as this, big
discontinuities/big disruptions, are truely newsworthy ... and perhaps ought
be publicized. Gump 'represents'a reasonable chunk of base Java code,
classes that are (no doubt) underneath a lot of Java applications, and if
this base suffers badly from a change, that will ripple significantly.

I know you blogged about this Stefan [1], but I wonder if we ought have
brought it up to the ASF board, and if the ASF board ought consider taking
action based of the findings. I don't know what could (or should) be done,
but I wonder if we need to be more vocal about the findings. It seems that
without nagging Gump is a passive observer, and -- like the tree falling in
the woods w/ nobody to see it -- did it happen?

[I know I'm overlooking the human factor here, the people who read the
output, but I think this is far fewer than the data could interest (we need
to market this information source).]

> > Since (I believe) JDK ought be compile compatible w/ older JDKs,
>
> Do you really belive this was true?  Or is this just what you whish
> would be true?  ;-)

Yup, bad wording. I don't beleive it ('cos I've learned that much from Gump
interacting w/ JDKs, from over the years) but I sure do wish it were true.
Gump has taught me that discontinuities happen -- even in the best
maintained projects, with the best intentions -- they have to be allowed
for "progress". That said, unintentional discontinuities are the pits, a
waste for everybody involved that slows progress, and I feel Gump needs to
help spotlight any such things. Who knows, maybe Sun would respond to ASF
highlighting a bunch of discontinuities. Maybe a dialogue ought occur.

> > Seems relatively healthy, and not too painful. That said, I'm not
> > expert, I'm just asking a question.

I thought about this (unfortunately) right after Brutus went down, so I
couldn't check what I was hoping. Kinda sad how the data disappears so
quickly. I figured a few nags might cause a few "enums" to be renamed, and
add some value speeding up the conversion. I'd not considered the nagatives
that you see. Time might help there, like you said, and we can give a little
to see if it does. Perhaps we ought nag (once a week/month) from a JDK 1.5
run.

All in all, I find the handling of the discontinuities -- the recording of
them, the bringing things to light -- the primary role of Gump, and I sure
wish we had a better way of documenting it/publicizing it. I think
individual failures in Gump (once stable in itself) ought generate a JIRA
entry (or database record) that gets worked/tracked to resolution. With some
level of consistency Gump's information would accumulate, not be lost, and
as a whole would be far more effective/valuable.

I think there is a lot to explore here, a lot to discuss, I just have a day
on diaper duty and breakfast to attend to [hence the no doubt
distracted/incomplete sentances].

regards,

Adam

[1] http://stefanbodewig.blogger.de/stories/167334/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org

Re: Move public onto JDK 1.5?

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On Sun, 22 May 2005, Adam R. B. Jack <aj...@apache.org> wrote:

> Does it make sense to move public (with nagging) to JDK 1.5?

Not yet, IMHO.

> Given that we can't support all configurations, and given the level
> of turmoil the JAXP 1.3 seems to be causing, ought we not just dive
> in w/ both feet & embrace change?

I find this time quite interesting since we see projects embrace JAXP
1.3 and in particular DOM3 at very different paces.

> Since (I believe) JDK ought be compile compatible w/ older JDKs,

Do you really belive this was true?  Or is this just what you whish
would be true?  ;-)

> Seems relatively healthy, and not too painful. That said, I'm not
> expert, I'm just asking a question.

If you look through the latest JDK 1.5 Gump runs you'll see a few
projects which look more or less dead (jython) but don't build and are
important in Gump's chain.

Switching to JDK 1.5 now may cause the projects that don't build
because they are specifiying an incompatible combination of -source
and -target or don't specify -source at all to improve.  It may also
lead to projects rethinking their dependencies, but probably not
(they'll simply not notice that their won project doesn't get built at
all).

All in all I think we'd drop the number of projects we build every
night considerably with no real hope to get back quickly.  So I'm
rather +/-0 to the idea (not -1 since I don't believe our chances
would improve too much if we'd wait any longer either).

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org

Re: Move public onto JDK 1.5? (was Re: Brutus going down)

[Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>]

On 23-05-2005 04:43, "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@apache.org> wrote:
> Does it make sense to move public (with nagging) to JDK 1.5?

+0. I haven't been paying much attention to java5.

- Leo




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org