ASF GitHub Bot commented on FOP-2733:

GitHub user aanno opened a pull request:


    FOP-2733: remove avalon

    I removed avalon (a project that is dead for over a decade now) from the 
code base. For this to happen, I've written a clean-room (i.e. I didn't looked 
at the avalon code) implementation of the few bits of avalon that are still in 
use by FOP. After that I fixed the tests.
    Apart from some minor stuff that is only used for testing, the main thing 
of avalon that was still in use was the Configuration stuff.
    I also renamed the packages name of the (now embeded) avalon stuff like 
    * `org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration` moved to 
    * `org.apache.avalon.framework.activity` moved to `org.apache.fop.activity`
    * `org.apache.avalon.framework.container`also moved to 
    This rename is completely optional, i.e. if there are concerns against it, 
I will update my change request and keep the original package names.
    I would be glad if you could consider my patch for merge into the `trunk` 
    Kind regards,

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/aanno/fop feature/pr-remove-avalon-1

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:


To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #43
commit 6ea0e7f79e4f5fd4056c727bd786db53b61b5ffd
Author: Thomas Pasch <thomas.pasch@...>
Date:   2019-01-08T18:30:52Z

    FOP-2733: remove avalon

commit abf5af144477c7d6975e9ce74d6a8bb0743fb7c7
Author: Thomas Pasch <thomas.pasch@...>
Date:   2019-01-08T19:12:59Z



> [PATCH] Drop dependency on Avalon-Framework
> -------------------------------------------
>                 Key: FOP-2733
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2733
>             Project: FOP
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Chris West
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: fop-no-avalon-1.patch
> FOP depends on avalon-framework, an old Apache project officially abandoned 
> in 2004. Nearly nobody uses avalon-framework anymore, and I'd like to see it 
> laid to rest.
> avalon-framework no-longer compiles with Java 9. Fixing it yet again seems 
> like insanity. This isn't a problem for Maven users, who can keep using the 
> old binary (and suffer slow verification on startup), but is a problem for 
> distros like Debian, who want to be able to build everything.
> Others have asked about this before, e.g. 
> http://apache-fop.1065347.n5.nabble.com/FOP-and-Avalon-td44302.html
> I propose removing the dependency on Avalon entirely, fixing the couple of 
> cases where it breaks, and inlining the two packages that are actually still 
> used.. I have created a patch here: 
> https://github.com/apache/fop/compare/trunk...FauxFaux:trunk , also attached.
> It's not great to read in patch form, so here's a summary of the changes:
>  * Remove dependence on avalon-framework from Maven, classpath variables etc.
>  * Add Avalon's configuration package as main:org.apache.fop.configuration 
> directly, and keep using it essentially unmodified.
>  * Add Avalon's logging framework as test:org.apache.fop.threading.logger. 
> This is only used in test code, in the threaded test code runner. It is 
> essentially source compatible with log4j/commons-logging, so could probably 
> be deleted.
>  * Change `CIDFontType` from a Avalon enum to a Java5 `enum`. This appears to 
> be source, but not binary, compatible.
>  * Remove some use of lifecycle management interfaces in test code, which are 
> not doing anything.
>  * Change some exception printing in test code to print the full exception 
> (using the Java api), instead of a truncated exception. The output is not 
> asserted upon, just sent to stderr.
>  * Stop using Cascading*Exception in tests, and for ConfigurationException. I 
> doubt anyone will notice, as it offers no real functionality.
> That's it!
> The most controversial thing here is probably adding the configuration 
> package, and the extra lines of code it drags along with it. I am happy to 
> give it a bit of a polish; make significant changes to fop to remove all the 
> unused interfaces / abstract classes (which are just waste); put some 
> generics and formatting in, etc.?

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to