Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12 #1175

octonato · 2018-01-11T14:30:04Z

Fixes: #1160
Fixes: #1152

octonato · 2018-01-11T21:59:27Z

We will need a new version of lightbend-markdown-server and corresponding plugin sbt-lightbend-markdown.

The sbt plugin has the server version hardcoded to 2.11 and therefore we can't move the documentation project to 2.12.

https://github.com/typesafehub/lightbend-markdown/blob/master/plugin/src/main/scala/com/lightbend/markdown/sbt/LightbendMarkdown.scala#L143-L149

(It took me ages to find out why sbt was insisting in bring com.lightbend.markdown#lightbend-markdown-server_2.11;1.6.0 instead of the 2.12 variant)

octonato · 2018-01-11T22:21:10Z

I just sent a PR to lightbend-markdown-server to fix it.

lightbend/lightbend-markdown#6

octonato · 2018-01-12T17:21:21Z

docs/project/plugins.sbt

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ lazy val plugins = (project in file(".")).dependsOn(dev)
 lazy val dev = ProjectRef(Path.fileProperty("user.dir").getParentFile, "sbt-plugin")

 resolvers += Resolver.typesafeIvyRepo("releases")
-addSbtPlugin("com.lightbend.markdown" %% "sbt-lightbend-markdown" % "1.6.0")
+addSbtPlugin("com.lightbend.markdown" %% "sbt-lightbend-markdown" % "1.6.1")


~~Pending. We need a new release of lightbend-markdown with support for 2.12~~
Done!

TimMoore · 2018-01-16T03:29:54Z

docs/build.sbt


 val AkkaVersion = "2.5.8"
 val JUnitVersion = "4.11"
 val JUnitInterfaceVersion = "0.11"
 val ScalaTestVersion = "3.0.4"
-val PlayVersion = "2.6.9"
+val PlayVersion = "2.6.10"


This will conflict with #1182. Was it needed for this change, or just something you were fixing up because you noticed it was out of sync?

just bumped the version, not really needed. We can remove to avoid the conflict with #1182

TimMoore · 2018-01-16T03:33:56Z

docs/manual/java/guide/build/LagomBuild.md

@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ We also recommend using Maven dependency management in your root project pom to

 #### A note on Scala versions

-When adding dependencies to Lagom libraries, you need to ensure that you include the Scala major version in the artifact ID, for example, `lagom-javadsl-api_2.11`.
+When adding dependencies to Lagom libraries, you need to ensure that you include the Scala major version in the artifact ID, for example, `lagom-javadsl-api_2.12`.


Maybe we should encourage use of the scala.binary.version property in the main doc as well as the migration guide (especially since the artifact uses it).

I considered that option for the docs, but kind of give up because many fragments don't have the full pom.xml and a reference to a variable without context could be confusing.

Do you think it will be ok if we add a note recommending the usage of scala.binary.verison variable and use it everywhere in the docs?

I didn't have that issue before because we were not cross-compiling, but now we do.

TimMoore · 2018-01-16T03:39:46Z

docs/manual/scala/releases/Migration14.md

@@ -59,7 +69,7 @@ The change to drop support for multiple services will require another code updat
  )
 ```

-That is now deprecated and will issue a warning on runtime (unfortunately Scala 2.11 will not cause a compilation warning because of the deprecation). The method replacing `describeServices` is `describeService` (in singular) and it will take an `Option[Descriptor]` instead of a list:
+That is now deprecated and will issue a warning on runtime (unfortunately Scala will not cause a compilation warning because of the deprecation). The method replacing `describeServices` is `describeService` (in singular) and it will take an `Option[Descriptor]` instead of a list:


As an aside, Scala 2.12 has a deprecatedOverriding annotation we can use in the future. However, despite the scaladoc saying it is available since 2.10, it was private[scala] until 2.12, so we can't use it until we drop 2.11 support.

It remains to be seen whether we drop 2.11 support before we drop this deprecated method 😄

TimMoore · 2018-01-16T03:42:28Z

docs/manual/java/guide/build/ImmutablesInIDEs.md

-The one caveat is that you should set the "Production sources directory" to `target/scala-2.11/src_managed/main` and the "Test source directory" to `target/src_managed/test`, instead of using the ones recommended in the linked instructions. The reason is that there are a couple of issues related to using immutables in IntelliJ with the IntelliJ sbt plugin (specifically, [SCL-8543](https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/SCL-8543) and [IDEA-117540](  https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-117540)).
-Finally, under "Project Structure" you should undo the exclusion of the `target`-directory and verify whether `target/scala-2.11/src_managed/main` is marked as 'Sources' for each module.
+The one caveat is that you should set the "Production sources directory" to `target/scala-2.12/src_managed/main` and the "Test source directory" to `target/src_managed/test`, instead of using the ones recommended in the linked instructions. The reason is that there are a couple of issues related to using immutables in IntelliJ with the IntelliJ sbt plugin (specifically, [SCL-8543](https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/SCL-8543) and [IDEA-117540](  https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-117540)).
+Finally, under "Project Structure" you should undo the exclusion of the `target`-directory and verify whether `target/scala-2.12/src_managed/main` is marked as 'Sources' for each module.


These paths might be misleading to anyone who doesn't migrate to 2.12. I wonder if there's a way to rephrase this to make it clear that you need to use the right directory for the selected Scala version. Maybe we can add a note saying the directories need to be adjusted for Scala 2.11 and link to "A note on Scala versions" in the doc below?

I'm adding the following:
(or target/scala-2.11/src_managed/main if using Scala 2.11)

TimMoore · 2018-01-16T03:45:37Z

docs/manual/common/concepts/LagomDesignPhilosophy.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Consider some of the basic requirements of a Reactive Microservice as identified

 The following Lagom characteristics promote these best practices:

-* Lagom is asynchronous by default --- its APIs make inter-service communication via streaming a first-class concept. All Lagom APIs use the asynchronous IO capabilities of [Akka Stream](https://akka.io/) for asynchronous streaming; the Java API uses [JDK8 `CompletionStage`](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/CompletionStage.html)  for asynchronous computation; the Scala API uses [Futures](https://www.scala-lang.org/api/2.11.8/#scala.concurrent.Future).
+* Lagom is asynchronous by default --- its APIs make inter-service communication via streaming a first-class concept. All Lagom APIs use the asynchronous IO capabilities of [Akka Stream](https://akka.io/) for asynchronous streaming; the Java API uses [JDK8 `CompletionStage`](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/CompletionStage.html)  for asynchronous computation; the Scala API uses [Futures](https://www.scala-lang.org/files/archive/api/2.12.4/scala/concurrent/Future.html).


http://www.scala-lang.org/api/2.12.x/scala/concurrent/Future.html might be a slightly more future-proof link (2.12.x instead of 2.12.4) and we use it elsewhere in ServiceImplementation.md.

There is another open PR that will update it

TimMoore

This is good, but should we also use the property in the other pages where we refer to Maven artifacts? I'm worried that someone might blindly copy and paste one of those POM fragments into a 2.11 project. Maven won't give you a nice warning like sbt does when you mix multiple Scala versions together. You'll just get a cryptic runtime error. If someone pastes in a snippet that refers to a non-existent property, at least they'll see an error that makes sense and would be easy to Google.

TimMoore · 2018-01-17T03:13:20Z

I went ahead and added a commit that changes all of the documentation to use scala.binary.version. What do you think?

Java users especially might not be aware of the reasons to update.

octonato · 2018-01-17T10:38:37Z

That's strange, I remember to have searched for all occurrences of _.2.12 and I only find it on the "Lagom Build" page. Which also surprised me because I had a vague memory that there were indeed more than one .md file to update. I probably had the search scope set wrongly in IntelliJ.

laaksonel · 2018-01-17T19:45:49Z

Is there lagom-sbt-plguin for 2.12 somewhere? The default project seems not to find the plugin since there's plugin only for version 2.10 available in the repository.

TimMoore · 2018-01-17T19:52:40Z

@Zecklar not yet published, but will be for 1.4.0 final. See #932.

TimMoore · 2018-01-17T21:18:21Z

1.4.x 67b3dda

steinybot · 2018-01-22T03:32:00Z

The sbt plugin projects are still using 2.10.6 by default. Is this intentional?

TimMoore · 2018-01-22T05:24:47Z

@steinybot yes, they need to build for sbt 0.13, which uses Scala 2.10.

laaksonel · 2018-01-24T21:16:23Z

@TimMoore Is there ETA for 1.4.0 final? Or alternatively unofficial builds for the plugin that I could copy to local repo?

TimMoore · 2018-01-25T00:00:24Z

@Zecklar later this week (or you can build from source)

octonato added 2 commits January 11, 2018 15:20

build defaults to 2.12.4

4c9f81c

docs must stay in 2.11.12 because of sbt-lightbend-markdown plugin

6f8e19e

octonato added 3 commits January 12, 2018 18:16

referenes upcoming lightbend-markdown version 1.6.1

f76b8db

docs using 2.12.4 + replaces all referrences to 2.11 by 2.12

9e7b801

updates migration guide - instruction on how to upgrade to 2.12

212f96e

octonato commented Jan 12, 2018

View reviewed changes

octonato changed the title ~~[WIP] Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12~~ Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12 Jan 15, 2018

TimMoore reviewed Jan 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

octonato added 4 commits January 16, 2018 11:46

PlayVersion back to 2.6.9

8689f58

There is another open PR that will update it

Link to ScalaDoc 2.12.x instead of 2.12.4

85f99b0

add links to target/scala-2.11 as well

1679634

Maven instructions with recommendation to use properties

2be2f23

TimMoore reviewed Jan 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

Use scala.binary.version across all documentation

c30e78b

Explain some benefits of moving to Scala 2.12

fb6a042

Java users especially might not be aware of the reasons to update.

TimMoore added this to the Lagom 1.4.0 milestone Jan 17, 2018

TimMoore merged commit 2415e66 into lagom:master Jan 17, 2018

TimMoore pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 17, 2018

Configure Lagom build to default to Scala 2.12 (#1175)

67b3dda

octonato deleted the scala-2.12 branch August 8, 2018 20:38

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12 #1175

Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12 #1175

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018 •

edited

Loading

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018

octonato Jan 12, 2018 •

edited

Loading

TimMoore Jan 16, 2018

octonato Jan 16, 2018

TimMoore Jan 16, 2018

octonato Jan 16, 2018

TimMoore Jan 16, 2018

TimMoore Jan 16, 2018

octonato Jan 16, 2018

TimMoore Jan 16, 2018

TimMoore left a comment

TimMoore commented Jan 17, 2018

octonato commented Jan 17, 2018

laaksonel commented Jan 17, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 17, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 17, 2018

steinybot commented Jan 22, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 22, 2018

laaksonel commented Jan 24, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 25, 2018

Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12 #1175

Configures Lagom build to default to 2.12 #1175

Conversation

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018 • edited Loading

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018

octonato Jan 12, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TimMoore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TimMoore commented Jan 17, 2018

octonato commented Jan 17, 2018

laaksonel commented Jan 17, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 17, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 17, 2018

steinybot commented Jan 22, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 22, 2018

laaksonel commented Jan 24, 2018

TimMoore commented Jan 25, 2018

octonato commented Jan 11, 2018 •

edited

Loading

octonato Jan 12, 2018 •

edited

Loading