OK, thanks Jacek. It's much more clear for me. OpenEJB is using "inlining" (org.apache.openejb.asm package). asm-finder dependency has been built using a maven module (removed since).
Fully agree with you: we have to restore this module in keep it in the common OpenEJB module management process. But something remains not clear (for us ;-)): why this module has been removed since last release ? May be David can give us a reason. Jean-Louis Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Jacek Laskowski > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> My understanding is that if you go back to org.objectweb package you >>> will >>> face hibernate issues because of ASM versions. >>> >>> Is that true ? >> >> Yes. That's the truth we have to struggle with. XBean comes with two >> binary incompatible versions of asm - 2.2.3 (xbean-reflect) and 3.1 >> (xbean-finder). Hibernate relies on 1.5.3. When those come together >> NCDFE surfaces. The only solution I can come up with is to shade >> org.objectweb.asm package or replace it with another and use it - >> that's how it works now in OpenEJB with asm-finder 3.1. The issue I'm >> facing at the moment is that I need to upgrade XBean to its latest >> version ot fix the issue with @ApplicationException handling, but >> asm-finder is not available in the repo (in its source form) so I >> can't upgrade xbean in it. I need to resurrect it. That's why I asked >> what was the reason to whack it after it was published to the repos. >> That's what I've not been able to explain so far. > > Just to add to the above - Dave did "inlining" (package renaming), but > there's another way to fix the issue with "shading". The difference is > how much work and where one is willing to do. The former - inlining - > requires source code changes because org.objectweb.asm turns into > another package so you're forced to use the newly-created package > afterwards. It's that you copy classes into another package - the > classes are alike as far as their bytecode go minus package > declaration and imports. The former approach - shading - requires no > code changes but needs to create "a bundle" of necessary jar deps as > one big jar plus package change. Very useful. > > For us, the best would be to repackage asm classes with inlining and > use the new packages in our code. > > Jacek > > -- > Jacek Laskowski > Notatnik Projektanta Java EE - http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/asm-repackaging---asm-finder-%2B-our-asm-package-in-use-highly-needed-tp23575152p23615518.html Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
