[hibernate-dev] [jboss-as7-dev] Which JBoss Logging version to use in AS and Hibernate Core

[Steve Ebersole]

Chill out man :)

Just making sure everyone know the ramifications and intentions.  

On Wed 09 Nov 2011 02:43:43 PM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> Yup, that's correct. And yeah #3 is optional which is why I said "may".
>
> On 11/09/2011 02:38 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>> Thanks David!
>>
>> Just to make sure I understand. Doing the steps above will allow the
>> built artifact to run in either AS 7.0 or 7.1. Correct?
>>
>> I thought we had said on IRC that Hibernate could really get away with
>> (1) and (2) and that JBoss AS 7.0 could specify to use JBoss Logging 3.0
>> via dep-mgmt in its pom(s) rather than allowing Hibernate (or others) to
>> pull in Logging 3.1.
>>
>> On Wed 09 Nov 2011 02:32:11 PM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>> OK folks. I've pushed out jboss-logging 3.1.0.CR1 and
>>> jboss-logging-tools 1.0.0.CR4.
>>>
>>> Here's what you need to do.
>>>
>>> 0. Update your dep versions (obviously)
>>> 1. Add the following switch to your annotation processing step (or to
>>> javac if it's combined): -AloggingVersion=3.0
>>> 2. Build your artifacts against jboss-logging 3.1.0.CR1.
>>> 3. When you publish the POMs for artifacts built this way, you may
>>> specify jboss-logging 3.0.0.GA as the required version, and it will be
>>> compatible with such.
>>>
>>> Basically what you're doing with the -AloggingVersion=3.0 flag is
>>> generating larger classes in exchange for backwards compatibility. If
>>> you develop other frameworks which are not expected to be supported on
>>> AS 7.0 (for example), you do not need this flag (logging version 3.1
>>> is required in this case).
>>>
>>> If this doesn't solve your issues please let me know right away.
>>>
>>> On 11/09/2011 08:47 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>> Yeah, the problem was that to *implement* BasicLogger we had 
>>>> switched to
>>>> using a base class (bundled in 3.1) to implement the multitude of
>>>> methods, due to problems associated with generating all the
>>>> implementations in every class.
>>>>
>>>> On 11/09/2011 08:39 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>>>>> Ok, I am totally confused then. I thought this was a discussion about
>>>>> BasicLogger. But we have been using that afaik way before our recent
>>>>> upgrade to 3.1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed 09 Nov 2011 08:23:33 AM CST, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 08:22 AM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:00:07 +0100, Steve Ebersole
>>>>>>> <steve at hibernate.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe instead of "shading in" the removed class you could just
>>>>>>>> add it
>>>>>>>> back to the JBoss Logging codebase?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right, why can we not do that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have it backwards. We didn't *remove* a class, we *added* one -
>>>>>> which makes it not present in 3.0.x.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/09/2011 04:48 AM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I see a few outputs
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - JBoss Logging 3.1.0.Final is released in the next 24h and we
>>>>>>>>> use it
>>>>>>>>> in Core and Search
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's stopping a 3.1.0.Final release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trying to resolve this issue for you guys.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

-- 
steve at hibernate.org
http://hibernate.org