Hi Mark, Yes, Romain raised this point to me on a separate thread. From what I can tell TomEE is using OpenJPA 2.2.0. Since your changes for openjpa-2171 only went into trunk, I'm wondering where the dependency is being managed. So, yes, we do need some input from the TomEE team as to whether this type of change would affect them.
Another alternative is to provide a shaded jar that embeds and hides the ASM deliverable within the OpenJPA jar. Yes, that jar would grow slightly (46K), but then nobody would be wiser as to what version of ASM is being used. Anyway, let's keep the conversation going... Thanks! Kevin On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kevin! > > We must also make sure to not hit a major incompat with tomee and other > systems. > I'll ping David and Romain so they can test this a bit. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Kevin Sutter <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:15 PM > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Upgrade to use ASM 4 for our post-enhancement > processing > > > > Hi, > > Some of you may have noticed a recent JIRA I opened up: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-2283 > > > > I created this for upgrading our current usage of ASM 3.2 to ASM 4.0. > > OpenJPA uses ASM for some post-enhancement processing to clean up the > stack > > map tables that are required for Java 7 validation. Since ASM 4 has more > > complete support for Java 7, I thought it would be an easy, > > preventative-care type of move. > > > > As my JIRA indicates, I have run into a couple of hiccups with this move > > that I am still working through. > > > > But, in general, does anybody have a concern with this upgrade? I'm only > > looking to do trunk at the moment. But, if we continue to hit Java 7 > > validation errors in 2.2.x, then I might consider moving it back to 2.2.x > > as well. > > > > Thanks for any input, > > Kevin > > >
