That's odd. Surely a reminiscence of JDK 1.4 compatibility.
As a matter of fact I'm looking forward to get rid of xpp3 at least in
wfs-ng, as it's not a standard pull parser, in favor of StAX. Xpp3 I guess
was added as a dependency when StAX was not a standardized API yet.
So, to start with, I'll try the xpp_min jar and see how/if it affects the
wfs module.
I seem to recall Justin uses it someplace else, maybe in the dispatcher, to
parse a little bit of an incoming request and figure out something out of
its first element or so, but I'm not really sure.
More insight once I try the xpp_min jar.
Cheers and thanks for the catch.
Gabriel
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Andrea Aime
<[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi,
> looking at the current classpath I've noticed that today we have two
> versions of xpp3 in the classpath (excerpt from dependency:tree):
>
> [INFO] | +- com.thoughtworks.xstream:xstream:jar:1.3.1:compile
> [INFO] | | \- xpp3:xpp3_min:jar:1.1.4c:compile
>
> and
>
> [INFO] +- org.geotools:gt-wfs:jar:2.7-SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] | +- org.geotools:gt-xml:jar:2.7-SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] | \- xpp3:xpp3:jar:1.1.3.4.O:compile
>
>
> The above dependency is odd, because gt-xml does not actually
> depend on xpp3, but looking in geotools pom files with find and
> grep I've found this:
>
> ./modules/unsupported/app-schema/app-schema/pom.xml:
> <artifactId>xpp3</artifactId>
> ./modules/unsupported/app-schema/webservice/pom.xml:
> <artifactId>xpp3</artifactId>
> ./modules/unsupported/wfs-ng/pom.xml: <artifactId>xpp3</artifactId>
> ./modules/unsupported/wfs/pom.xml: <artifactId>xpp3</artifactId>
> ./pom.xml: <artifactId>xpp3</artifactId>
>
> The reason I'm looking is that the full xpp3 has a class,
> javax.xml.namespace.QName
> that should not be there (it's part of the java runtime), and causes
> issues with JBoss 5.
> The xpp3_min jars do not have it instead.
>
> So I'm wondering about two things:
> - can we at least harmonize the two versions so that we can use one and
> only
> one xpp3 jar?
> - is the full xpp3 really needed, or can we get along with the "min"
> version,
> maybe with some code modifications in geotools?
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Tech lead
>
> Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
> 55054 Massarosa (LU)
> Italy
>
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 962313
> mob: +39 339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://geo-solutions.blogspot.com/
> http://www.youtube.com/user/GeoSolutionsIT
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/andreaaime
> http://twitter.com/geowolf
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
> Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
> also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
> _______________________________________________
> Geoserver-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>
--
Gabriel Roldan
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
