[hibernate-dev] Javassist dependency conflict in the ORM modules for WildFly

[Gunnar Morling]

No, JPADependencyProcessor - which is adding the dependency - is part of
"wildfly-jpa", not "jipijapa-hibernate".

2016-10-27 11:23 GMT+02:00 Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>:

> We could fix 1) as well by incorporating the sources for
> jipijapa-hibernate52 in ORM.
>
> I think it belongs within Hibernate, as it won't be the last time that a
> new ORM version requires some adaptation of bootstrap.
>
> On 27 Oct 2016 09:51, "Gunnar Morling" <gunnar at hibernate.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2016-10-27 4:27 GMT+02:00 Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com>:
>>
>> >
>> > > Unless I am mistaken, Gunnar is suggesting that the Hibernate ORM
>> module
>> > (the WF module) export Javassist.  Not the application.
>> >
>>
>> Right, Hibernate ORM's module should be the one exposing it, not the
>> application nor JipiJapa.
>>
>> This allows the ORM module to expose the right version of Javassist (or
>> none at all eventually) without requiring JipiJapa to have the knowledge
>> about this. As things stand, Javassist can be considered as part of ORM's
>> API, hence it's module.xml should be the one making it available to the
>> user.
>>
>> Of course eventually we don't want to expose Javassist at all, but as long
>> as we do, the ORM module should be in charge of doing so.
>>
>> > >
>> >
>> > I agree, that is what our WF pull request did, which I think is an
>> > incremental improvement but that wasn't approved for the reason I gave.
>> >
>>
>> I don't quite get the reasoning here. We all agree that Javassist
>> shouldn't
>> be exposed at all (and there is good progress being made towards this by
>> using ByteBuddy).
>>
>> But as long as we do, leaving this responsibility to the ORM module is the
>> right thing to do IMO. E.g. what if a JPA provider doesn't need Javassist
>> at all? Still JipiJapa would currently add it to the deployment.
>>
>> I've done the following changes locally:
>>
>> 1) Altered JPADependencyProcessor to not add the Javassist dependency to
>> the deployment
>> 2) Altered module.xml of jipijapa-hibernate5 to not depend on Javassist
>> 3) Added a new module for the latest Javassist
>> 4) Altered module.xml of ORM itself to depend on that new module *and*
>> re-export it
>>
>> With all this in place, the tests in Hibernate Search pass successfully.
>>
>> Scott, do you think we can try another PR with that? Again, it doesn't
>> change things in terms of exposure of Javassist to the application (it is
>> exposed, just as it was before). But it puts the responsibility for doing
>> so to ORM's module, allowing us (via the ORM module ZIP we provide) to
>> expose a newer Javassist version as needed.
>>
>> Note that 2 - 4 can be done via the ORM module ZIP. But 1) is a change
>> that
>> needs to be done on the WF side, at least I don't see how this could be
>> overridden?
>>
>> I.e. the module ZIP is rather pointless atm. and we don't have a good way
>> to put the latest ORM into WF user's hands. Would be nice to change this.
>>
>> >> Is the ORM testsuite building the WildFly app server from source?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Good god no :)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> Other option would be to use ByteBuddy to generate proxies instead of
>> > >> Javassist to eliminate the application dependency on the Javassist
>> > >> runtime classes.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Rafael Winterhalter is actually pretty far along on defining support
>> for
>> > Byte Buddy in Hibernate[1].  So that might soon be an option.
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-11152
>> > >
>> > +100 :)
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>
>