Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Is there a reason to have org.apache.comm

[Eike Stepper <stepper@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Scott,

I tried to vote on this bug and leave a comment about the logging 
version. Did you disable voting for ECF bugs? I can not find that link ;-(

Cheers
/Eike

----
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper


Am 20.05.2010 16:44, schrieb Scott Lewis:
> Hi Stephane,
>
> Yes.  I've seen the 'strongly encouraged' notice.  Perhaps to move 
> this along you would like to contribute the implementation and testing 
> of the HttpClient 4.0-based provider?  You can do so via this enhancement
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=251740
>
> If you or others wish to contribute to this, please notify the ECF 
> team as we already have some partial work done and can provide other 
> support.
>
> Scott
>
> Stéphane Bouchet wrote:
> > FYI,
> >
> > Looking in the httpclient page :
> > "Commons HttpClient 3.x codeline is nearing the end of life. All 
> > users of Commons HttpClient 3.x are strongly encouraged to upgrade to 
> > HttpClient 4.0."
> >
> > looking at the dependencies, the last 4.0.1 comes with 
> > commons-logging 1.1.1 :)
> >
> > Scott Lewis a écrit :
> > > FWIW,
> > >
> > > Yes...as Pascal and John A indicated, ECF is using the apache 
> > > httpclient (3.1) and this dictates a dependency on commons logging 
> > > 1.0.4.
> > > We (ECF, etc) would be completely willing to move some other 
> > > mutually agreed upon version of commons logging, but there are some 
> > > important subtleties:  Since it's httpclient that depends upon 
> > > 1.0.4, once a replacement version of commons logging was selected, 
> > > someone would have to look for/test for regression in httpclient 3.1 
> > > in order to do so...since there's unfortunately no guarantee that 
> > > httpclient 3.1 doesn't have a hard dependency on 1.0.4 (I'm not 
> > > saying there is or anything...just that we don't know, and 
> > > discovering something like that could be dramatically bad if the 
> > > change was done cavalierly...especially this late in the game).
> > >
> > > All this by way of saying...I think aligning on a version would be 
> > > fine (I mean...other than the version upon which we're aligned 
> > > now)...but it's unfortunately not trivial for us to safely change 
> > > this dependency...particularly without some available resource to 
> > > check/test for possible regression.
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > Martin Taal wrote:
> > > > This topic (commons.logging 1.0.4 being supplied and other projects 
> > > > needing 1.1) has also cost me several hours and many builds. I 
> > > > would not be surprised if it also cost others a few hours (so we 
> > > > talk about mandays of work).
> > > >
> > > > So from my point of view it would be great if Eclipse projects can 
> > > > align on the version used for such a base jar file as 
> > > > commons.logging....
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > With Regards, Martin Taal
> > > >
> > > > Springsite/Elver.org
> > > > Office: Hardwareweg 4, 3821 BV Amersfoort
> > > > Postal: Nassaulaan 7, 3941 EC Doorn
> > > > The Netherlands
> > > > Cell: +31 (0)6 288 48 943
> > > > Tel: +31 (0)84 420 2397
> > > > Fax: +31 (0)84 225 9307
> > > > Mail: mtaal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - mtaal@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > Web: www.springsite.com - www.elver.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Pascal Rapicault wrote:
> > > > > This is being brought in by org.apache.commons.httpclient which is 
> > > > > used by p2 (through ECF)
> > > > > Do you know if they are compatible with each others? Did you try 
> > > > > running with just the 1.1 version? Remember that at Apache, 
> > > > > version numbers don't necessarily have the same semantics than 
> > > > > eclipse. Actually worse, ppl just bump versions without really 
> > > > > thinking.
> > > > >
> > > > > At this point p2 ships 1.0.4 because we don't know any better. 
> > > > > However given all the problems we have had around transports in p2 
> > > > > and the time it took us to stabilize I'm really not inclined to 
> > > > > change that just for source issues of a third party bundle.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2010-05-20, at 6:42 AM, Eike Stepper wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I noticed that many projects depend on o.a.c.logging 1.1.x+ while 
> > > > > > the platform still includes 1.0.4. That causes duplicate bundles 
> > > > > > and some build problems regarding the respective source bundles. 
> > > > > > Would it be possible to agree on a common version?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > /Eike
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----
> > > > > > http://thegordian.blogspot.com
> > > > > > http://twitter.com/eikestepper
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> > > > > > cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> > > > > cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> > > > cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> > > cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> > cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev