bval-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 1.1.2 Release
Date Sat, 22 Oct 2016 09:12:28 GMT
2016-10-22 11:03 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de.invalid>:

> Currently trying to look what we really use.
> Most usage is nothing but really trivial null-safe variants of java.lang
> methods.
> That imo doesn’t justify pulling in 300kB of jars which might create
> dependency clashes.
>
> Which is the reason I started this in the first place.
> My situation was that we use TomEE which ships with a certain
> commons-lang3 version.
> But due to some other libs needed a newer commons-lang3 we crashed with a
> NoMethodFound Exception.
> So we had to patch TomEE just for that. Not much work for me, but other
> people might search much longer…
>
>
This is another point I think - excepted this should be solvable without
patching but configuring the loader and that tomee should stay up to date
for commons.

That said if we can solve get rid of it +1.


> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 22.10.2016 um 09:16 schrieb Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I guess there are a lot of classes being shaded in that are referenced,
> but
> > not necessarily used from BVal. Shall we retract the shading for now,
> then?
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de.invalid
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I proposed to shade it in as I thought we only use a few classes. Should
> >> max add 20kB.
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>> Am 21.10.2016 um 21:10 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>
> >>> If it adds some 100k we can keep the dep and propose a classified shade
> >> if
> >>> we want but for tomee the not shaded is nice.
> >>>
> >>> Le 21 oct. 2016 21:03, "Mark Struberg" <struberg@yahoo.de.invalid>
a
> >> écrit :
> >>>
> >>>> Guess I need till tomorrow.
> >>>> Found a few things which I like to review
> >>>>
> >>>> 72385 Apr  7  2016 /Users/struberg/.m2/repository/org/apache/bval/
> >>>> bval-core/1.1.1/bval-core-1.1.1.jar
> >>>> 266823 Oct 21 20:53 /Users/struberg/.m2/repository/org/apache/bval/
> >>>> bval-core/1.1.2-SNAPSHOT/bval-core-1.1.2-SNAPSHOT.jar
> >>>>
> >>>> 373824 Apr  7  2016 /Users/struberg/.m2/repository/org/apache/bval/
> >>>> bval-jsr/1.1.1/bval-jsr-1.1.1.jar
> >>>> 603287 Oct 21 20:53 /Users/struberg/.m2/repository/org/apache/bval/
> >>>> bval-jsr/1.1.2-SNAPSHOT/bval-jsr-1.1.2-SNAPSHOT.jar
> >>>>
> >>>> I know we now shade in a few commons classes. But that should not add
> so
> >>>> much imo. Maybe we still have some glitch with the shading?
> >>>> Will check tonight or tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>>
> >>>>> Am 21.10.2016 um 20:30 schrieb Mark Struberg
> <struberg@yahoo.de.INVALID
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just let me take a look at it. Should max take an hour.
> >>>>> Will run with openjpa later as well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> LieGrue,
> >>>>> strub
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Am 21.10.2016 um 16:53 schrieb Matt Benson <mbenson@apache.org>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It looks like it is time to roll a release candidate. I plan
to act
> as
> >>>>>> release manager this time around; this email is just meant to
give a
> >>>>>> (short) heads-up.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message