does the newer erlang-oauth break anything?
On 6 October 2011 18:52, Filipe David Manana <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: >> If there are no objections, I'm going to build the first 1.1.1 >> candidate in the morning and start a new thread for the release. > > As pointed out in 2 other related threads, we have some compilation > warnings about functions that will no longer exist in OTP R15 (to be > released by the end of this year): > > /opt/r14b03/bin/erlc +debug_info oauth_http.erl > ./oauth_http.erl:13: Warning: http:request/4 is deprecated and will be > removed in R15B; use httpc:request/4 > /opt/r14b03/bin/erlc +debug_info oauth_plaintext.erl > /opt/r14b03/bin/erlc +debug_info oauth_rsa_sha1.erl > ./oauth_rsa_sha1.erl:9: Warning: public_key:pem_to_der/1: deprecated > (will be removed in R15A); use file:read_file/1 and > public_key:pem_decode/1 > ./oauth_rsa_sha1.erl:10: Warning: public_key:decode_private_key/1 is > deprecated and will be removed in R15A; use > public_key:pem_entry_decode/1 > ./oauth_rsa_sha1.erl:22: Warning: public_key:pem_to_der/1: deprecated > (will be removed in R15A); use file:read_file/1 and > public_key:pem_decode/1 > /opt/r14b03/bin/erlc +debug_info oauth_unix.erl > > The ones regarding public_key concern me, as it will break the OAuth > authentication handler. > I see 2 solutions: > > 1) upgrade erlang-oauth to the same version we have in trunk/1.2.x > (doesn't produce these warnings) > > 2) modify the erlang-oauth in 1.1.x and use try catches where the > catch would call the equivalent versions in R14/R15 (these new > functions don't exist in R13B03 for example) > > Naturally, I would prefer 1) > > The warnings about http:request can be ignored I think, as in Couch we > don't use any codepath that will execute the deprecated function > >> >> B. >> >> On 6 October 2011 12:05, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Thanks all, I've pushed the change to 1.1.x. make check and futon all >>> pass; review would still be nice. :) I simply reverted the two >>> commits. >>> >>> B. >>> >>> On 6 October 2011 12:02, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Oct 6, 2011, at 10:30 , Robert Newson wrote: >>>> >>>>> There is no build of 1.1.1 on Ubuntu 11.x that will work as well as >>>>> 1.1.0, so I think it's correct that it cannot build under those >>>>> conditions. >>>>> >>>>> Let's get 1.1.1 out, with the many useful bug fixes and tweaks, and >>>>> then focus on getting 1.2 out with 1.8.5 support (and "BREAKING >>>>> CHANGES"). >>>>> >>>>> I vote +1 to removing 1.8.5 support and the paren hack from 1.1.x. >>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Jan >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> B. >>>>> >>>>> On 6 October 2011 09:25, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> All, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Paul Davis has researched the issue and it seems intractable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would like to remove 1.8.5 support from 1.1.1. It was not present in >>>>>>> 1.1.0 so will not be (officially) missed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The place for a breaking change of this magnitude is 1.2, not a minor >>>>>>> bug fix release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> B. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 on removing the paren hack for sure. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not sure about removing 1.8.5 support completely. On the one hand, it >>>>>> would prevent breakage because people couldn't link against the >>>>>> breaking SM. On the other hand, it prevents people from linking >>>>>> against 1.8.5 which means it won't build on Ubuntu 11.x. >>>>>> >>>>>> Unless someone comes up with a magic option I'd say put it to an >>>>>> informal vote so that I can blame someone else. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 5 October 2011 18:25, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Yes, its release blocking. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> All, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I went through JIRA and updated CHANGES and NEWS on origin/1.1.x to >>>>>>>>> include everything that was missing (Sidenote: Can we all keep this >>>>>>>>> file up to date when commit bugfixes or add features?). I'd appreciate >>>>>>>>> everyone giving it a look over before I start to build the release >>>>>>>>> artifact. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I believe there's an outstanding issue (not present in JIRA) around >>>>>>>>> javascript function evaluation? Can someone confirm that it's release >>>>>>>>> blocking? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> B. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > > -- > Filipe David Manana, > > "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. > Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. > That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men." >
