No, not currently. We created
to move the exporting of
Javassist, to the WildFly static ORM module, so that Hibernate native
applications would automatically get the Javassist classes. That
wouldn't of directly addressed your situation but it would of updated
the WildFly JPA container (JPADependencyProcessor class) to no longer
do the javassist export, so you would of had more control. I don't
think that
is likely to
be merged. Instead, ORM needs to stop expecting the application
classpath to include Javassist dependency and then we can update
JPADependencyProcessor to stop exporting Javassist.
Perhaps we could discuss this in person soon, to see if we are all on
the same page. My current understanding is that this will be
addressed when we switch to Byte Buddy, but the shading (Javassist)
idea may also help, as we could stop exporting Javassist from the
WildFly JPA container.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:36 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
Following Steve's suggestions I thought I had a reasonable and
clean
plan, but it's not working in practice.
Turns out that even after me cleaning up all references to
"org.javassist:main", it's still been forced on the classpath by
hard-coded rules in the JPADependencyProcessor, so conflicting with
the right version:
-
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/6b61a6003f704221f66dcd9f418bcb7af...
Is there any way I can prevent this injection from happening? Can I
override this JPADependencyProcessor?
Thanks,
Sanne
On 11 January 2017 at 19:42, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> I'm not really sure but did notice that HikariCP [1] shaded the
> Javassist runtime classes in 2015 and still seems to be shading
> Javassist.
>
> Good point about about the compatibility impact, as build time
> instrumentation with the non-shaded Javassist will produce a Java
> archive that doesn't work with the shaded Javassist. The application
> will get a CNFE exception unless they add a dependency on the unshaded
> Javassist classes. I would expect the same problem when we change
> from using Javassist to using Byte Buddy.
>
> [1]
https://github.com/brettwooldridge/HikariCP/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=j...
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Emmanuel Bernard
> <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
>> The one small issue is that if the user enhanced the classes at build time (i,e.
not via the ClassTransformer), then shading in a newer version of Wildfly means that the
same app using the later version will fail unless you rebuild the app.
>> BTW is Javassist Shadable, some of these libs can’t due to string referencing
classnames and other fun tricks like that.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>>> On 11 Jan 2017, at 17:35, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
wrote:
>>>> I think the best option in terms of supporting legacy ORM version users
>>>> would be to incorporate a change in those branches to shade/shadow
Javassist
>>>> into ORM specific packages (in hibernate-core).
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I understand it, it is always ORM that does the enhancement, right
Scott?
>>>
>>> Yes, ORM always does the enhancement.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:12 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ahh, I was confused then, your talking about the WildFly ORM static
>>>>> module definition [1], which is not controlled by the JPA container
or
>>>>> JipiJapa.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We talked about this not long ago and possible solutions, the
only
>>>>>>> agreed on solution was to eliminate the ORM requirement for
Javassist
>>>>>>> classes to be on the application classpath, by switching to
ByteBuddy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like I replied to Gunnar, that's a different problem. Sorry
all for
>>>>>> the confusion!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In this case it's Hibernate ORM which is being fed two
different
>>>>>> versions of Javassist simultaneously; clearly that's our
fault. The
>>>>>> application classpath is not affected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you could use one of the previously suggested solutions
in your
>>>>>>> testing? For example, your application could use a shaded
Javassist
>>>>>>> jar, that doesn't interfere with the ORM Javassist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not trying to use Javassist. If only the flags to disable
it would
>>>>>> work I'd be happy to disable it ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> There are no flags for controlling [1], if you want control, just
fork
>>>>> WildFly and make occasional changes to the static module definitions
>>>>> that meet your testing changes. Just keep the changes as minimal as
>>>>> possible, so it is easy to sync up the (test purposes) fork. The
>>>>> painful part though might be trying to push your fork to maven, so
>>>>> perhaps this is a bad idea, but still wanted to mention it, in case
it
>>>>> could help.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why don't you contribute code changes instead to WildFly?
I did
>>>>>>> create a pull request for
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5773
>>>>>>> that is still pending, to remove some unneeded dependencies.
This
>>>>>>> won't get merged without an EAP jira that goes with it,
which I don't
>>>>>>> plan to create, since there is no EAP need for the change.
Pull
>>>>>>> request is
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/9305.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks! Sure I'd be happy to contribute these to WildFly, but
knowing
>>>>>> which dependency is needed - or MIGHT be needed in certain
>>>>>> configurations - requires in depth knowledge of the module one
wants
>>>>>> to cleanup.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure how you could dynamically update the ORM static
module
>>>>> definition [1].
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just have the *impression* that some of these dependencies are
no
>>>>>> longer needed, but going back and forth between projects at
different
>>>>>> releases - and supposed to support various other versions -
doesn't
>>>>>> make it easy.
>>>>>
>>>>> ORM definitely still needs the Javassist dependency, but we should
>>>>> drop ASM, as that is not needed, as well as a few others.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I suspect that if the adaptor code itself was bundled directly
with
>>>>>> the consuming JPA implementor, this would come more natural? Just
an
>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, but others didn't when this came up on the JPA expert
group
>>>>> mailing list before.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See the problem is Hibernate Search needs to test with latest ORM
way
>>>>>> more regularly, so I can't wait for PRs to be included in
WildFly,
>>>>>> even less so if they are on hold because of even slower EAP
cycles.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that you really need control over the static ORM module
>>>>> definitions. If you don't want to fork WildFly for testing,
perhaps
>>>>> you could modify the static orm module definition before starting
the
>>>>> app server, for the testing. Sounds like a pita.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being
exposed to the
>>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, I agree. You said this before but its ORM that
requires
>>>>>>> Javassist classes to be on the application classpath. ORM
does not
>>>>>>> require the Byte Buddy classes to be on the application
classpath.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa
itegration
>>>>>>>> to support it and move it into its own private module.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, ORM doesn't require Byte Buddy to be on the
application classpath,
>>>>>>> which means that Byte Buddy can be what you want, a separate
private
>>>>>>> ORM module. This is a feature of WildFly modules, not
JipiJapa.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I mean is that JipiJapa is currently triggering enhancement
via
>>>>>> Javassist; it's not giving me an option to use Byte Buddy
instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Its more that the WildFly JPA container, allows the persistence
>>>>> provider to register a javax.persistence.spi.ClassTransformer
>>>>> instance, to be called when entity class definitions are loaded, as
>>>>> per the JPA requirements. JipiJapa doesn't get involved, as
there is
>>>>> a standard JPA contract that ORM uses, so JipiJapa couldn't
influence
>>>>> use of Byte Buddy or CGLIB or Javassist...
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So since the sources for that are in yet another project, it
looks
>>>>>> like I'd need 6 months to finish my ORM upgrade in Search.
Luckily
>>>>>> I'll aim for a different solution ;)
>>>>> :(
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>>
https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/feature-pack/src/main/reso...
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev