[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher #1

reckart · 2018-03-22T02:32:29Z

Several changes allowing a successful build of UIMA using a Java 9+ JDK.

- Update plugins and plugin dependencies to be compatible with Java 9+ - When building on Java 9 and higher, instead of adding `--add-modules java.xml.bind` rather explicitly depend on JAXB dependencies

- Fixed JavaDoc issues appearing when building with Java 9+

- Work around different behavior in generating line breaks in Java 9+

mischor · 2018-03-28T20:56:33Z

uimaj-core/pom.xml

    </plugins>
  </build>
+  <profiles>
+    <!-- ************ Java 9 enablement ************** -->


I wonder if we could name this java 9 or 10 enablement?

Java 9+ ? ; )

mischor · 2018-03-28T20:57:30Z

uimaj-core/pom.xml

+        <dependency>
+          <groupId>javax.xml.bind</groupId>
+          <artifactId>jaxb-api</artifactId>
+          <version>2.3.0</version>


Do you think that depending on some earlier version might get rid of that problem with extra new lines creeping in?

I have no idea if the newline issue is related to JAXB. I rather expect that changes in the XSLT code introduce the newlines because turning off the pretty-print option in one test case fixed it... but well, it might be worth a try.

mischor · 2018-03-28T21:04:37Z

uimaj-core/src/main/java/org/apache/uima/analysis_engine/annotator/package.html

 <p>The Annotator Interfaces, along with supporting interfaces
 and exception classes.</p>
-<p>The annotator interfaces are as follows:
+<p>The annotator interfaces are as follows:</p>


Some sources (e.g. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/java/index-137868.html ) say to only use the
tag, not the
. Also, I vaguely recall one of the javadoc lint checker tools complaining if you used some of these closing tags. also this https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5260368/which-tag-should-be-used-as-paragraph-separator-in-javadoc says the doclet doesn't like the closing

To embed HTML in a comment, enclose it in single quotes (for inline HTML) or three single quotes to begin a verbatim block (and later again to end it.

ok, my comment should say that the javadoc tool (at least for java 8, maybe for 9/10) complained if you put in the closing paragraph tag '
' . So these probably should not be added?

Hm... I guess "single quote" was not right and I should have said "backtick" (`)

The closing paragraph tag is not a problem. What JavaDoc 8+ does not like is self-closing elements (<br/>, <hr/>, etc.).

Mind that the closing tag was already there before, but it was in an illegal position after the </ul> - all I did is move it before the <ul>.

mischor · 2018-03-28T21:05:43Z

uimaj-core/src/main/java/org/apache/uima/cas/impl/package.html

 <p>Implementation and Low-Level API for the CAS Interfaces.</p>
 <p>Internal APIs. Use these APIs at your own risk. APIs in this package are subject to change without notice, even in minor releases. Use of this package is not supported. If you think you have found a bug in this package, please try to reproduce it with the officially supported APIs before reporting it.</p>
-<hr />
+<hr>


please run the javadoc with java 9 / 10 to see if any of these closing tags get complaints...

JavaDoc 9/10 (and actually I think even 8) do not like self-closing HTML elements.

mischor · 2018-03-28T21:12:34Z

uimaj-parent/pom.xml

              </execution>
            </executions>
+            <dependencies>
+              <dependency>


any way to factor this common set of dependencies into one spot?

As UIMA dependencies, we can add them to the parent POM such that all modules inherit them.

However, if individual Maven plugins require these dependencies (such as here), I know of no way to do a single declaration that would affect all plugins. Mind that that each plugin has its own classloader.

mischor

made some comments... a couple of questions...

reckart · 2018-03-28T21:15:49Z

Already answered them ;)

reckart · 2018-03-28T21:27:59Z

I am unsure if it is a wise idea to have the JAXB dependencies in a profile which activates on a Java 9+ JDK or if it would be better to simply have them as general runtime dependencies, even under Java 8. Do you have any opinion on that?

reckart · 2018-03-28T21:31:58Z

Note: in case anybody is watching this... the UIMA project presently does not make use of GitHub (and the GitHub/ASF integration). We are basically toying around here to explore what the use of GitHub might contribute to the UIMA project development workflow.

mischor · 2018-03-28T21:55:41Z

re: JAXB dependencies for Java 8 - In the interest of stability, I would leave these for Java 9/10, and not put them in for Java 8.

reckart · 2018-03-28T21:57:43Z

I am a bit worried that it makes the build less reproducible. E.g. distributions or fat JARs would end up having different sets of dependencies depending on which JDK was used to build them.

- Remove closing `</p> - Renamed profile to `java9plus` / also update the comment - Moved profile to parent pom - Changed JAXB scope to `runtime`

reckart · 2018-03-30T02:23:00Z

@mischor so, I made some changes to address your comments:

Remove closing </p>
Renamed profile to java9plus / also update the comment
Moved profile to parent pom
Changed JAXB scope to runtime

I also tried running tests with older JAXB and I even tried explicitly adding old Xalan and Xerces versions as dependencies, but none of these measures made the test succeed in their original form.

mischor · 2018-03-30T13:45:45Z

I'm ok with these changes. Can you summarize on the uima-dev list?
I think your guess about extra new lines being caused by the xslt transform code is likely true... so changing the JAXB stuff wouldn't have an effect. I wonder if we can change / depend on a particular version of xslt transform code?

reckart · 2018-03-30T14:02:24Z

@mischor As I wrote, I tried explicitly depending on Xalan (2.7.2 and 2.7.1) and Xerces (2.9.1) and even Xalan Serializer (2.7.1 and 2.7.2) in the Java9+ profile - to no avail. Note that I assume that Java uses these libraries if they are on the classpath - I didn't explicitly force the use of a specific XML implementation.

mischor · 2019-09-09T20:55:34Z

This was fixed for Java 11 in UIMA-5753.

reckart added 3 commits March 21, 2018 23:29

[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher

1af71ac

- Update plugins and plugin dependencies to be compatible with Java 9+ - When building on Java 9 and higher, instead of adding `--add-modules java.xml.bind` rather explicitly depend on JAXB dependencies

[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher

2fd71eb

- Fixed JavaDoc issues appearing when building with Java 9+

[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher

6ee2f2f

- Work around different behavior in generating line breaks in Java 9+

mischor reviewed Mar 28, 2018

View reviewed changes

[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher

f3089bf

- Remove closing `</p> - Renamed profile to `java9plus` / also update the comment - Moved profile to parent pom - Changed JAXB scope to `runtime`

mischor closed this Sep 9, 2019

[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher #1

[UIMA-5753] Get UIMA compile on Java 9 and higher #1

Uh oh!

Conversation

reckart commented Mar 22, 2018

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

reckart Mar 28, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mischor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

reckart commented Mar 28, 2018

Uh oh!

reckart commented Mar 28, 2018

Uh oh!

reckart commented Mar 28, 2018

Uh oh!

mischor commented Mar 28, 2018

Uh oh!

reckart commented Mar 28, 2018

Uh oh!

reckart commented Mar 30, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mischor commented Mar 30, 2018

Uh oh!

reckart commented Mar 30, 2018

Uh oh!

mischor commented Sep 9, 2019

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

reckart Mar 28, 2018 •

edited

Loading

reckart commented Mar 30, 2018 •

edited

Loading