Re: publishing poi xmlbeans jars

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

I declared Lazy Consensus on Board@ for POI to take the XMLBeans product. So 
far we have two positive responses.

Do we have LAZY CONSENSUS?

FYI - I did a full search of lists.apache.org  for 
mentions of XMLBeans through sometime in August 2017

Here are the projects:

XMLBeans
———
ODE
NetBeans
Axis
Camel
UIMA
CXF
Struts (2.3)
Nifi
Axis
ManifoldCF
Nutch
Maven(?)
WS
OpenMeetings
Buildr
Synapse
OpenWebBeans
ServiceMix
JUDDI (2.4)
Flink
Sling (2.3)

POI
——
Nifi
Solr
Zika
ManifoldCF
ServiceMix

I think we should continue to build and release a new version of XMLBeans 2.7.0

When we do so we update the website.

Meanwhile it would be fair to let all of these PMCs know our plan and why this 
is needed. They can then help if they would like.

BTW - The XMLBeans project used JIRA ….

Regards,
Dave

> On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:50 AM, Mark Murphy  wrote:
> 
> That will make things a lot easier. Thanks Dave.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> Hi -
>> 
>> Given the Attic position and the mention of Royale. I will just take this
>> to the Board.
>> 
>> They could take a resolution moving directly to POI. I will ask for this
>> first.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>>> On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi -
>>> 
>>> As both an IPMC member and as a POI PMC member I would prefer that we
>> direct to POI.
>>> 
>>> I think we (POI) need to take over the XMLBeans Product.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
 On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Mark Murphy  wrote:
 
 So Oracle is removing JAXB from Java SE, Depricated in v9, to be
>> removed in
 v11. I think we are stuck with XMLBeans for a while anyway. POI can
>> sponsor
 XMLBeans which can then be put into incubation. At that point we can
>> make
 updates. At some point XMLBeans emerges from incubation to be either a
 sub-project of POI, or it's own TLP. That need not be a big issue. We
>> just
 need to keep it from being terminated. It isn't bad to be in Incubation.
 NetBeans is in Incubation. It will just stay there until we figure out
>> how
 to manage it. If we take it over, we already have a community. The
 important part is to get it to a point where we can make updates to it.
>> I
 think just making a fork for us, and giving it a new namespace could
>> cause
 problems down the road with other projects that use POI and XMLBeans.
 
 On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:45 AM, pj.fanning  wrote:
 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/attic-general/
>> 201803.mbox/browser
> 
> I think we could spend a lot of time on the attic approach.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.
>> html
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org
> 
> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: publishing poi xmlbeans jars

[Mark Murphy]

That will make things a lot easier. Thanks Dave.

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:

> Hi -
>
> Given the Attic position and the mention of Royale. I will just take this
> to the Board.
>
> They could take a resolution moving directly to POI. I will ask for this
> first.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> > On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >
> > Hi -
> >
> > As both an IPMC member and as a POI PMC member I would prefer that we
> direct to POI.
> >
> > I think we (POI) need to take over the XMLBeans Product.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> >> On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Mark Murphy  wrote:
> >>
> >> So Oracle is removing JAXB from Java SE, Depricated in v9, to be
> removed in
> >> v11. I think we are stuck with XMLBeans for a while anyway. POI can
> sponsor
> >> XMLBeans which can then be put into incubation. At that point we can
> make
> >> updates. At some point XMLBeans emerges from incubation to be either a
> >> sub-project of POI, or it's own TLP. That need not be a big issue. We
> just
> >> need to keep it from being terminated. It isn't bad to be in Incubation.
> >> NetBeans is in Incubation. It will just stay there until we figure out
> how
> >> to manage it. If we take it over, we already have a community. The
> >> important part is to get it to a point where we can make updates to it.
> I
> >> think just making a fork for us, and giving it a new namespace could
> cause
> >> problems down the road with other projects that use POI and XMLBeans.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:45 AM, pj.fanning  wrote:
> >>
> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/attic-general/
> 201803.mbox/browser
> >>>
> >>> I think we could spend a lot of time on the attic approach.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.
> html
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
>

Re: publishing poi xmlbeans jars

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

Given the Attic position and the mention of Royale. I will just take this to 
the Board.

They could take a resolution moving directly to POI. I will ask for this first.

Regards,
Dave

> On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> Hi -
> 
> As both an IPMC member and as a POI PMC member I would prefer that we direct 
> to POI.
> 
> I think we (POI) need to take over the XMLBeans Product.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
>> On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Mark Murphy  wrote:
>> 
>> So Oracle is removing JAXB from Java SE, Depricated in v9, to be removed in
>> v11. I think we are stuck with XMLBeans for a while anyway. POI can sponsor
>> XMLBeans which can then be put into incubation. At that point we can make
>> updates. At some point XMLBeans emerges from incubation to be either a
>> sub-project of POI, or it's own TLP. That need not be a big issue. We just
>> need to keep it from being terminated. It isn't bad to be in Incubation.
>> NetBeans is in Incubation. It will just stay there until we figure out how
>> to manage it. If we take it over, we already have a community. The
>> important part is to get it to a point where we can make updates to it. I
>> think just making a fork for us, and giving it a new namespace could cause
>> problems down the road with other projects that use POI and XMLBeans.
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:45 AM, pj.fanning  wrote:
>> 
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/attic-general/201803.mbox/browser
>>> 
>>> I think we could spend a lot of time on the attic approach.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: publishing poi xmlbeans jars

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

As both an IPMC member and as a POI PMC member I would prefer that we direct to 
POI.

I think we (POI) need to take over the XMLBeans Product.

Regards,
Dave

> On Mar 2, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Mark Murphy  wrote:
> 
> So Oracle is removing JAXB from Java SE, Depricated in v9, to be removed in
> v11. I think we are stuck with XMLBeans for a while anyway. POI can sponsor
> XMLBeans which can then be put into incubation. At that point we can make
> updates. At some point XMLBeans emerges from incubation to be either a
> sub-project of POI, or it's own TLP. That need not be a big issue. We just
> need to keep it from being terminated. It isn't bad to be in Incubation.
> NetBeans is in Incubation. It will just stay there until we figure out how
> to manage it. If we take it over, we already have a community. The
> important part is to get it to a point where we can make updates to it. I
> think just making a fork for us, and giving it a new namespace could cause
> problems down the road with other projects that use POI and XMLBeans.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:45 AM, pj.fanning  wrote:
> 
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/attic-general/201803.mbox/browser
>> 
>> I think we could spend a lot of time on the attic approach.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org
>> 
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: publishing poi xmlbeans jars

[Mark Murphy]

So Oracle is removing JAXB from Java SE, Depricated in v9, to be removed in
v11. I think we are stuck with XMLBeans for a while anyway. POI can sponsor
XMLBeans which can then be put into incubation. At that point we can make
updates. At some point XMLBeans emerges from incubation to be either a
sub-project of POI, or it's own TLP. That need not be a big issue. We just
need to keep it from being terminated. It isn't bad to be in Incubation.
NetBeans is in Incubation. It will just stay there until we figure out how
to manage it. If we take it over, we already have a community. The
important part is to get it to a point where we can make updates to it. I
think just making a fork for us, and giving it a new namespace could cause
problems down the road with other projects that use POI and XMLBeans.

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:45 AM, pj.fanning  wrote:

> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/attic-general/201803.mbox/browser
>
> I think we could spend a lot of time on the attic approach.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org
>
>

Re: publishing poi xmlbeans jars

[pj.fanning]

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/attic-general/201803.mbox/browser

I think we could spend a lot of time on the attic approach.




--
Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

Re: Single Java 9 module jar?

[pj.fanning]

I had a quick look at it looks like we'd have to move a lot of classes to new
packages.
Maybe, the poi-all jar is the path of least resistance.



--
Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

Re: Single Java 9 module jar?

[Nick Burch]

On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, pj.fanning wrote:
Could we consider keeping all the jars but ensure that no package spans 
jars?


We'd need to re-package all the jars by component / area. You couldn't 
have a HSSF only one for example, it'd need to be HSSF+XSSF+SS if there 
was to be no package spanning.


Nick

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

Re: Single Java 9 module jar?

[pj.fanning]

Could we consider keeping all the jars but ensure that no package spans jars?



--
Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-Dev-f2312866.html

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

RE: Single Java 9 module jar?

[Murphy, Mark]

Yet another reason to consider package reorganization.

-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:n...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 6:15 AM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: Single Java 9 module jar?

Hi All

>From my understanding of Java 9 modules, you basically can't have one package 
>split across multiple jars. This is an issue for us, as we do split things 
>betwen core, scratchpad and ooxml, to permit people to minimise their jar 
>sizes by excluding components they don't want.

Longer term, we could maybe look at having per-component jars. In the short 
term... I think if we just bundled the 3 jars together and dropped in a module 
info file, that'd fix things for Java 9 module users at the expense of them 
having to get all of POI (no exclusions).

Build wise, it'd be really simple - just generate an extra jar with the 
contents of the 3 base jars included, along with the module info file, and call 
it something like poi-all-java9.

What do people think of this idea? Any downsides? Comments? Suggestions?

Also, would David North like to share his Java 9 module slides from his talk a 
few weeks back? :)

Cheers
Nick

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org For additional commands, 
e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

[Bug 62151] Illegal reflective access by org.apache.poi.util.DocumentHelper and org.apache.poi.util is accessible from more than one module

[bugzilla]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151

Nick Burch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
 OS||All

--- Comment #1 from Nick Burch  ---
The former we're unlikely to fix - Apache POI has multiple jars which make up
the project and allow you to exclude the parts of the project you don't want.
Because of design decisions taken by the Java 9 jigsaw team, our only fix is to
provide a single uber-jar with everything in. We're discussing that now, but
you could easily build your own if you wanted in the mean time

The latter I don't know how we can fix. For security reasons, we need to tell
the built-in Java XML parser to turn on non-default settings to increase the
parsing security. I don't believe that there's a public API for doing that,
only the private ones.

Are you able to find any Java 9 advice on how to turn on the XML security
features with the built-in xml parser using only public calls in Java 9?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

Single Java 9 module jar?

[Nick Burch]

Hi All

From my understanding of Java 9 modules, you basically can't have one 
package split across multiple jars. This is an issue for us, as we do 
split things betwen core, scratchpad and ooxml, to permit people to 
minimise their jar sizes by excluding components they don't want.


Longer term, we could maybe look at having per-component jars. In the 
short term... I think if we just bundled the 3 jars together and dropped 
in a module info file, that'd fix things for Java 9 module users at the 
expense of them having to get all of POI (no exclusions).


Build wise, it'd be really simple - just generate an extra jar with the 
contents of the 3 base jars included, along with the module info file, and 
call it something like poi-all-java9.


What do people think of this idea? Any downsides? Comments? Suggestions?

Also, would David North like to share his Java 9 module slides from his 
talk a few weeks back? :)


Cheers
Nick

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org

JDK 10: Release Candidate & JDK 11 Early Access builds available

[Rory O'Donnell]

    Hi Dominik,

*JDK 10 build 45 is our JDK 10 Release Candidate and now available at 
http://jdk.java.net/10/*


 * Schedule, status & features
 o http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/10/
 * Release Notes
 o http://jdk.java.net/10/release-notes
 * Summary of changes in b45:
 o JDK-8198658  -
   Docs still point to JDK 9 docs

*JDK 11 EA build 3, under both the GPL and Oracle EA licenses, are now 
available at **http://jdk.java.net/11**.*


 * Schedule, status & features
 o http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/11/
 * Release Notes:
 o http://jdk.java.net/11/release-notes
 * Summary of changes
 o https://download.java.net/java/early_access/jdk11/2/jdk-11+2.html
 * JEPs targeted to JDK 11, so far
 o 309: Dynamic Class-File Constants 
 o 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector
   
 o *320: **Remove the Java EE and CORBA Modules
   *
   **
 + ** *This build includes JEP 320, so build is significantly
   smaller (nine fewer modules, 22 fewer megabyteson Linux/x64).*
 o 323: Local-Variable Syntax for Lambda Parameters
   
 * Open Source Project fixes in JDK 11 build 1
 o JDK-8195096 -
   Apache Tomcat
 + Exception with custom LogManager on starting Apache Tomcat
 o JDK-8193802 -
   Apache Maven
 + NullPointerException from JarFileSystem.getVersionMap()
 o JDK-8191842  -
   jOOQ
 + JShell: Inferred type information is lost when assigning
   types to a "var"

Finally, the Crypto roadmap 
 was updated - 
23-Feb-2018**

**

 * Add support for AEAD TLS Cipher Suites
 o Target date changed from 2018-04-17 to 2018-07-17


Regards,
Rory

--
Rgds,Rory O'Donnell
Quality Engineering Manager
Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland