Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Anyone (still) using BCEL?
> Has there been precedent of packaging a non-final release in Orbit? That has been done before (with IP staff's blessing -- some restrictions may apply). Ideally it would only be done if fairly sure it would be formally released before our formal release ... but, not a hard requirement, as long as well communicated. One "mechanism" by which this is done, is to make obvious in qualifier it is "not final", such as to use x.y.z.draft. That way "draft" is pretty "low" and would be replaced by anything starting with "v" as it would be the final version (if, by chance, say, their release was exactly the same as their release candidate). If you go down this path, you can open Orbit bugs and discuss on orbit-dev list. ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
[cross-project-issues-dev] Anyone (still) using BCEL?
Hi, Object Teams is facing problems after the platform's move to Java 8, because our traditional bytecode weaver is based on BCEL 5.2, which cannot handle Java 8 bytecode. While we have a new ASM-based weaver about ready for prime-time, I would love to keep the BCEL-based weaver as an option. (They do have some fundamentally different properties). Are any other Eclipse projects are (still) using BCEL? I can see that BCEL has fixed the problem in their code. While a BCEL 6.0 release is dragging over many months now, maybe we could adopt their latest release candidate into Orbit? Anyone to join forces? Has there been precedent of packaging a non-final release in Orbit? regards, Stephan ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
