I checked again and the function doing the glob matching in Java 7 is not that complicated so we (me or Graham, whoever raises his hand first ;-)) will reimplement that.
So from Saros/I (for the moment): JDK 6 is great! Holger Schmeisky; holge...@fu-berlin.de Takustraße 9, Room 008, Freie Universität Berlin, 14195 Berlin +49 176 64146306 Am 20.10.2014 um 09:00 schrieb Holger Schmeisky: > So what's the conclusion? > > The ignore-file feature is not IDE depended, so it could in theory move > to the core module. But do we want this feature to be available in Eclipse? > > If not, I would go for Saros/I with Java 1.7 and Saros/E with Java 1.6 > (If there are no other reasons than backwards-compatibility - as Stefan > pointed out a lot of developers can not upgrade existing installations). > > Regards, > Holger > > Holger Schmeisky; holge...@fu-berlin.de > Takustraße 9, Room 008, Freie Universität Berlin, 14195 Berlin > +49 176 64146306 > > Am 16.10.2014 um 15:57 schrieb Stefan Rossbach: >> It does (almost ?) not matter which JDK version you use to execute >> Saros, do other stuff and whatever as long as you compile the whole >> source with a JDK 1.6 version. >> >> The reason we use 1.6 is mainly that we do not need any 1.7 features and >> so provide support especially for big companies where it sometimes ain't >> that easy to install >> the software you like on your development PC etc. >> >> On 16.10.2014 15:50, Arsenij E Solovjev wrote: >>> And yes, we test do static analysis on Saros with Java 1.7, but we >>> build it with 1.6 >>> >>> On 10/16/2014 03:04 PM, Stefan Rossbach wrote: >>>> Just updated to PowerMock 1.5.6 but still get the same error. >>>> >>>> On 16.10.2014 14:55, Stefan Rossbach wrote: >>>>> The SarosSessionManagerTest runs fine but not the SarosSessionTest >>>>> >>>>> java.lang.VerifyError: Inconsistent stackmap frames at branch target >>>>> 167 in method >>>>> de.fu_berlin.inf.dpp.concurrent.watchdog.ConsistencyWatchdogClient.runRecovery(Lorg/eclipse/core/runtime/IProgressMonitor;)V >>>>> at offset 212 >>>>> at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredMethods0(Native Method) >>>>> at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredMethods(Unknown Source) >>>>> at java.lang.Class.getMethod0(Unknown Source) >>>>> at java.lang.Class.getMethod(Unknown Source) >>>>> at >>>>> org.easymock.internal.ObjectMethodsFilter.<init>(ObjectMethodsFilter.java:55) >>>>> at >>>>> org.easymock.internal.MocksControl.createMock(MocksControl.java:59) >>>>> at org.easymock.EasyMock.createNiceMock(EasyMock.java:139) >>>>> at >>>>> de.fu_berlin.inf.dpp.project.internal.SarosSessionTest.setUp(SarosSessionTest.java:330) >>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source) >>>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source) >>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Unknown Source) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.runBefores(MethodRoadie.java:129) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.runBeforesThenTestThenAfters(MethodRoadie.java:93) >>>>> at >>>>> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit44MethodRunner.executeTest(PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:294) >>>>> at >>>>> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit47RunnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit47MethodRunner.executeTestInSuper(PowerMockJUnit47RunnerDelegateImpl.java:127) >>>>> at >>>>> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit47RunnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit47MethodRunner.executeTest(PowerMockJUnit47RunnerDelegateImpl.java:82) >>>>> at >>>>> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit44MethodRunner.runBeforesThenTestThenAfters(PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:282) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.runTest(MethodRoadie.java:84) >>>>> at org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.run(MethodRoadie.java:49) >>>>> >>>>> But again the compiled Saros byte code (1.7 JVM) would not cause any >>>>> problems when running in a 1.7 JVM or higher. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16.10.2014 14:48, Zieris, Franz wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Just to get this straight: >>>>>> >>>>>> ·There is a bug in JAssist, which is used by PowerMock, which we >>>>>> use for mocking static members in some of our test cases. >>>>>> >>>>>> ·You are using the same settings as I did and your JUnit test cases >>>>>> run smoothly? So, where is the relevant difference in our setups? >>>>>> >>>>>> Franz >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:*Stefan Rossbach [mailto:srossb...@arcor.de] >>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 2:39 PM >>>>>> *To:* Zieris, Franz >>>>>> *Cc:* dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [DPP-Devel] Can the IntelliJ plugin target Java 7+ >>>>>> >>>>>> Fine, but this has nothing to do with Saros. Just look at the stack >>>>>> trace. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://code.google.com/p/powermock/issues/detail?id=355 >>>>>> >>>>>> The bug is marked as fixed in JAssist >>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JASSIST-160 >>>>>> >>>>>> And still it does not work. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 16.10.2014 14:32, Zieris, Franz wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Stefan, >>>>>> >>>>>> Concerning the failing JUnit tests, here is what I did: >>>>>> >>>>>> ·Used recent master version (commit 07e0c1e) >>>>>> >>>>>> ·Changed the target version of dpp.core and Saros/E >>>>>> (right-click > “Build Path” > “Configure Build Path …” > Tab >>>>>> “Libraries” > Select “JRE System Library [JavaSE-1.6]” > “Edit >>>>>> …” > Change to “JavaSE-1.7”) >>>>>> >>>>>> ·Cleaned the workspace and re-build everything àno compiler errors >>>>>> >>>>>> ·Ran the SarosCoreTestSuite àall green >>>>>> >>>>>> ·Ran the SarosEclipseTestSuite à10 errors >>>>>> (SarosSessionManagerTest, SarosSessionTest) >>>>>> >>>>>> See below for the copy-pasted error message of the failing test >>>>>> class SarosSessionManagerTest. >>>>>> >>>>>> Franz >>>>>> >>>>>> Details: java.lang.VerifyError: Bad <init> method call from >>>>>> inside of a branch >>>>>> >>>>>> Exception Details: >>>>>> >>>>>> Location: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> de/fu_berlin/inf/dpp/project/internal/SarosSession.<init>(Lde/fu_berlin/inf/dpp/net/xmpp/JID;Ljava/lang/String;Ljava/lang/String;IILde/fu_berlin/inf/dpp/ISarosContext;)V >>>>>> @99: invokespecial >>>>>> >>>>>> Reason: >>>>>> >>>>>> Error exists in the bytecode >>>>>> >>>>>> Bytecode: >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000000: 2a19 062b 1504 1505 2c2d 3a0d 3a0c 360b >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000010: 360a 3a09 3a08 3a07 1300 4fb8 0016 1006 >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000020: bd00 0459 0319 0853 5904 1909 5359 05bb >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000030: 0051 5915 0ab7 0054 5359 06bb 0051 5915 >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000040: 0bb7 0054 5359 0719 0c53 5908 190d 5313 >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000050: 0056 b800 1eb8 005a 3a0f 190f b200 2aa5 >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000060: 000a 2ab7 005c a700 1619 0719 0819 0915 >>>>>> >>>>>> 0000070: 0a15 0b19 0c19 0db7 005e 0157 b1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Stackmap Table: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> full_frame(@105,{UninitializedThis,Object[#103],Object[#75],Object[#75],Integer,Integer,Object[#77],UninitializedThis,Object[#77],Object[#103],Integer,Integer,Object[#75],Object[#75],Top,Object[#4]},{}) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> full_frame(@124,{Object[#2],Object[#103],Object[#75],Object[#75],Integer,Integer,Object[#77],Object[#2],Object[#77],Object[#103],Integer,Integer,Object[#75],Object[#75],Top,Object[#4]},{}) >>>>>> >>>>>> at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredMethods0(Native Method) >>>>>> >>>>>> at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredMethods(Unknown Source) >>>>>> >>>>>> at java.lang.Class.getMethod0(Unknown Source) >>>>>> >>>>>> at java.lang.Class.getMethod(Unknown Source) >>>>>> >>>>>> at >>>>>> >>>>>> org.easymock.internal.ObjectMethodsFilter.<init>(ObjectMethodsFilter.java:55) >>>>>> >>>>>> at >>>>>> org.easymock.internal.MocksControl.createMock(MocksControl.java:59) >>>>>> >>>>>> at >>>>>> >>>>>> org.powermock.api.easymock.PowerMock.doCreateMock(PowerMock.java:2212) >>>>>> >>>>>> at >>>>>> org.powermock.api.easymock.PowerMock.doMock(PowerMock.java:2163) >>>>>> >>>>>> at >>>>>> >>>>>> org.powermock.api.easymock.PowerMock.createNiceMock(PowerMock.java:187) >>>>>> >>>>>> at >>>>>> >>>>>> de.fu_berlin.inf.dpp.project.SarosSessionManagerTest.setUp(SarosSessionManagerTest.java:97) >>>>>> >>>>>> […] >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:*Stefan Rossbach [mailto:srossb...@arcor.de] >>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 2:23 PM >>>>>> *To:* Zieris, Franz; dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> <mailto:dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [DPP-Devel] Can the IntelliJ plugin target Java 7+ >>>>>> >>>>>> On 16.10.2014 14:09, Zieris, Franz wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi there, >>>>>> >>>>>> I would favor having the same Java support for all Saros >>>>>> versions, so if we’d actually rely on Java 7 for Saros/I, >>>>>> Saros/E should no longer support Java 6, too. >>>>>> >>>>>> I see two immediate technical issues here: >>>>>> >>>>>> (1)One change that would be necessary is in our test and >>>>>> build infrastructure (“saros-build”), which currently uses >>>>>> Java 7 for doing some code analysis, but Java 6 for >>>>>> compilation (am I right, Arsenij?). >>>>>> >>>>>> (2)The second one involves our source code itself. Quick >>>>>> test: Changing the target version for the Core and Saros/E >>>>>> currently leads to no compilation errors, but some Saros/E >>>>>> JUnit tests fail. This needs to be investigated first. >>>>>> >>>>>> Which JUnit tests are failing ? I am running Java JDK 1.7 and >>>>>> get no failures when running a local regression ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have no idea how many Saros (actual or potential) users >>>>>> out there still rely on Java 6. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does anyone have any numbers that could suit as a proxy? >>>>>> >>>>>> Stefan: Do our anonymous statistics contain the used Java >>>>>> version? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes they do, only spotted Java 1.7 and 1.8 so far. >>>>>> >>>>>> But the question is: In which module should Grahams changes be >>>>>> implemented ? If it is only IntelliJ then their is no problem >>>>>> to use Java 1.7 for IntelliJ and >>>>>> Java 1.6 for Eclipse. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Franz >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:*Graham Allan [mailto:grundlefl...@gmail.com] >>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 15, 2014 7:37 PM >>>>>> *To:* dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> <mailto:dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >>>>>> *Subject:* [DPP-Devel] Can the IntelliJ plugin target Java 7+ >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there any reason that the IntelliJ plugin should not >>>>>> target Java 7+ as the runtime environment? >>>>>> >>>>>> The specific motivation for me is to be able to use Java >>>>>> NIO's glob matching, in order to evaluate the rules >>>>>> specified in a .gitignore file. This was previously >>>>>> fulfilled by JGit, but having that dependency was seen as >>>>>> undesirable, I think due to file size concerns. Not having >>>>>> to reimplement glob matching (the equivalent of the POSIX >>>>>> fnmatch function) would save a lot of effort and maintenance. >>>>>> >>>>>> Another approach would be to pull out the part of JGit >>>>>> which did this, which targeted Java 5 I believe, and >>>>>> include this source code in Saros. That code is under the >>>>>> Eclipse Public License, I'm not 100% sure on the legality >>>>>> of that, or the impact of including something non-GPL in >>>>>> the Saros distributable, but I think that's valid. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Graham >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. >>>>>> >>>>>> Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. >>>>>> >>>>>> Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push >>>>>> notifications. >>>>>> >>>>>> Take corrective actions from your mobile device. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> >>>>>> DPP-Devel mailing list >>>>>> >>>>>> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> <mailto:DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. >>>>> Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. >>>>> Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. >>>>> Take corrective actions from your mobile device. >>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> DPP-Devel mailing list >>>>> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. >>>> Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. >>>> Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. >>>> Take corrective actions from your mobile device. >>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> DPP-Devel mailing list >>>> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. >>> Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. >>> Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. >>> Take corrective actions from your mobile device. >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> DPP-Devel mailing list >>> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. >> Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. >> Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. >> Take corrective actions from your mobile device. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DPP-Devel mailing list >> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. > Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. > Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. > Take corrective actions from your mobile device. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho > _______________________________________________ > DPP-Devel mailing list > DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho _______________________________________________ DPP-Devel mailing list DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
