Dependencies issue

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Dependencies issue

Russel Winder-2
Is there any reason why we cannot upgrade out JUnit dependency to 4.8.1
and Groovy-All to 1.7.1 ?

Did we ever discover whether a GPars compiled against only a single
Groovy-All will actually work with all versions of Groovy?  

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                            xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: sip:[hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder

signature.asc (204 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dependencies issue

Vaclav
Administrator
Hi Russel,

the JUnit upgrade should be fine, I'll do it. With Groovy 1.7.1 I'm not certain we wouldn't break compatibility for Groovy 1.6 users. Otherwise I'd be very happy to shift gears.
Our current dependency on 1.6.7 seems not to generate any complains from the community.

Regards,

Vaclav


On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Russel Winder <[hidden email]> wrote:
Is there any reason why we cannot upgrade out JUnit dependency to 4.8.1
and Groovy-All to 1.7.1 ?

Did we ever discover whether a GPars compiled against only a single
Groovy-All will actually work with all versions of Groovy?

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                           xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: [hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder



--
E-mail: [hidden email]
Blog: http://www.jroller.com/vaclav
Linkedin page: http://www.linkedin.com/in/vaclavpech
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dependencies issue

Russel Winder-2
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 11:12 +0100, Vaclav Pech wrote:
> Hi Russel,
>
> the JUnit upgrade should be fine, I'll do it. With Groovy 1.7.1 I'm
> not certain we wouldn't break compatibility for Groovy 1.6 users.
> Otherwise I'd be very happy to shift gears.
> Our current dependency on 1.6.7 seems not to generate any complains
> from the community.
>
We should be able to switch to 1.6.8 trivially with no qualms.  If this
leads to problems then it is a bug with Groovy.  This applies to
whichever series of Groovy is used except when there is a public notice
of a breaking change across a bug fix release (which there should never
be).

The 1.6 series is effectively deprecated, the 1.7 series is the current
official release, and despite the problems of dependencies, 1.7.1 seems
to be worth having -- 1.7.1 does appear to be faster than 1.7.0.

I guess an issue here is Grails?  To make it easy for them to embed
GPars we should use the same series of Groovy they use.  Currently
Grails 1.2.1 uses Groovy 1.6.7 and embeds GParallelizer 0.8.3.  We
should perhaps check what they are doing for Grails 1.3, there certainly
seems to be a huge upgrading of all dependencies going for this.

I still think we should just create builds again Groovy 1.6 and Groovy
1.7 (and indeed Groovy Trunk) then there is no problem at all.  This is
what was done for Gant (due to pressure from Grails :-) -- but to be
fair the Grails team did the hard work of updating the Gant build for
Gant at the time) and once the multi-module build was set up it really
is no hassle at all.

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                            xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: sip:[hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder

signature.asc (204 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dependencies issue

Vaclav
Administrator
It sounds like http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GPARS-65 to me. I'm still not sure we want to pay to extra maintenance penalty to support multiple builds yet not having the benefits of using Groovy 1.7 features. Or would the 1.7.1 performance boost justify the move? If so, I'd prefer a naming, which would omit the Groovy version for the 1.7 compliant artifacts, and keep Groovy version in the 1.6 compatible jars.

Vaclav

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Russel Winder <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 11:12 +0100, Vaclav Pech wrote:
> Hi Russel,
>
> the JUnit upgrade should be fine, I'll do it. With Groovy 1.7.1 I'm
> not certain we wouldn't break compatibility for Groovy 1.6 users.
> Otherwise I'd be very happy to shift gears.
> Our current dependency on 1.6.7 seems not to generate any complains
> from the community.
>
We should be able to switch to 1.6.8 trivially with no qualms.  If this
leads to problems then it is a bug with Groovy.  This applies to
whichever series of Groovy is used except when there is a public notice
of a breaking change across a bug fix release (which there should never
be).

The 1.6 series is effectively deprecated, the 1.7 series is the current
official release, and despite the problems of dependencies, 1.7.1 seems
to be worth having -- 1.7.1 does appear to be faster than 1.7.0.

I guess an issue here is Grails?  To make it easy for them to embed
GPars we should use the same series of Groovy they use.  Currently
Grails 1.2.1 uses Groovy 1.6.7 and embeds GParallelizer 0.8.3.  We
should perhaps check what they are doing for Grails 1.3, there certainly
seems to be a huge upgrading of all dependencies going for this.

I still think we should just create builds again Groovy 1.6 and Groovy
1.7 (and indeed Groovy Trunk) then there is no problem at all.  This is
what was done for Gant (due to pressure from Grails :-) -- but to be
fair the Grails team did the hard work of updating the Gant build for
Gant at the time) and once the multi-module build was set up it really
is no hassle at all.

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                           xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: [hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder



--
E-mail: [hidden email]
Blog: http://www.jroller.com/vaclav
Linkedin page: http://www.linkedin.com/in/vaclavpech
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dependencies issue

Vaclav
Administrator
We probably need to resolve http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GPARS-2 and so automate the generated artifact upload to a download site, before we introduce the Groovy-version-specific builds. The current manual process will certainly be too much of a hassle if the number of artifacts doubles.

Cheers,

Vaclav


On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Vaclav Pech <[hidden email]> wrote:
It sounds like http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GPARS-65 to me. I'm still not sure we want to pay to extra maintenance penalty to support multiple builds yet not having the benefits of using Groovy 1.7 features. Or would the 1.7.1 performance boost justify the move? If so, I'd prefer a naming, which would omit the Groovy version for the 1.7 compliant artifacts, and keep Groovy version in the 1.6 compatible jars.

Vaclav


On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Russel Winder <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 11:12 +0100, Vaclav Pech wrote:
> Hi Russel,
>
> the JUnit upgrade should be fine, I'll do it. With Groovy 1.7.1 I'm
> not certain we wouldn't break compatibility for Groovy 1.6 users.
> Otherwise I'd be very happy to shift gears.
> Our current dependency on 1.6.7 seems not to generate any complains
> from the community.
>
We should be able to switch to 1.6.8 trivially with no qualms.  If this
leads to problems then it is a bug with Groovy.  This applies to
whichever series of Groovy is used except when there is a public notice
of a breaking change across a bug fix release (which there should never
be).

The 1.6 series is effectively deprecated, the 1.7 series is the current
official release, and despite the problems of dependencies, 1.7.1 seems
to be worth having -- 1.7.1 does appear to be faster than 1.7.0.

I guess an issue here is Grails?  To make it easy for them to embed
GPars we should use the same series of Groovy they use.  Currently
Grails 1.2.1 uses Groovy 1.6.7 and embeds GParallelizer 0.8.3.  We
should perhaps check what they are doing for Grails 1.3, there certainly
seems to be a huge upgrading of all dependencies going for this.

I still think we should just create builds again Groovy 1.6 and Groovy
1.7 (and indeed Groovy Trunk) then there is no problem at all.  This is
what was done for Gant (due to pressure from Grails :-) -- but to be
fair the Grails team did the hard work of updating the Gant build for
Gant at the time) and once the multi-module build was set up it really
is no hassle at all.

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                           xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: [hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder






--
E-mail: [hidden email]
Blog: http://www.jroller.com/vaclav
Linkedin page: http://www.linkedin.com/in/vaclavpech
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dependencies issue

Russel Winder-2
In reply to this post by Vaclav
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 18:29 +0100, Vaclav Pech wrote:
> It sounds like http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GPARS-65 to me. I'm
> still not sure we want to pay to extra maintenance penalty to support
> multiple builds yet not having the benefits of using Groovy 1.7
> features. Or would the 1.7.1 performance boost justify the move? If
> so, I'd prefer a naming, which would omit the Groovy version for the
> 1.7 compliant artifacts, and keep Groovy version in the 1.6 compatible
> jars.
>
As long as GPars only uses Groovy features that are the same in Groovy
1.6, 1.7, 1.8, etc. then there is little problem.  The doubt arises
because of what the Groovy Compiler might do in terms of code
generation.  So the issue is whether the GPars jar compiled with
1.6.8/1.7.1/trunk is compatible with 1.6.8/1.7.1/trunk -- perm all
combinations.

On the one hand we could say that no-one has raised an issue about this
in practice so we don't have a problem.  On the other hand are there
enough people out there trying this just now that we can be sure that
all permutations are being exercised?

Clearly this is not a rush issue so we have time to mull on it.


--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                            xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: sip:[hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder

signature.asc (204 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dependencies issue

Russel Winder-2
In reply to this post by Vaclav
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 18:32 +0100, Vaclav Pech wrote:
> We probably need to resolve http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GPARS-2
> and so automate the generated artifact upload to a download site,
> before we introduce the Groovy-version-specific builds. The current
> manual process will certainly be too much of a hassle if the number of
> artifacts doubles.
>
I had forgotten about this issue.  Given that I have the Gant deployment
fully automated using Gradle (with multi-module builds), doing the same
for GPars must be straightforward.  The only real problem with the logic
here is that no-one with serious Gradle knowledge has reviewed the Gant
build, so I have no idea if the use of Gradle is hacky or reasonable.

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      Partner
                                            xmpp: [hidden email]
Concertant LLP        t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,   f: +44 8700 516 084   voip: sip:[hidden email]
London SW11 1EN, UK   m: +44 7770 465 077   skype: russel_winder

signature.asc (204 bytes) Download Attachment