On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Deepak Bhole
<dbhole@redhat.com> wrote:
* Vipul Amler <vipulnsward@gmail.com> [2012-03-23 03:11]:
> Hi all,
>
Hi Vipul,
> I am Vipul A. M. a Final Year Computer Science Student.
> I am interested to work on Java API/ABI changes checker proposed by
> Stanislav Ochotnický
> over here [1].
>
> I have been having discussions with him for the past 1-2 weeks and
> getting to know more about the Java Packaging
> System needs on Fedora{and other, need of all platforms as he says},
> and the various pathways for [1]
>
> Till now, I have been trying to understand more how and where the need
> for [1] is
> as also the available solutions, and pathways there could be. Me
> learning from Java API Compliance Checker [2] and others
> our discussions have come down to,
>
I think this is a great idea.
> * Developing a Java based framework for matching results for single jar
> to that of [1]
> * Work on build environment to analyse the breakage at CLASSPATH and
> other relevant levels
> * Create a comparison based large database for analyzing or suggesting
> how to proceed ahead.
Which developers would this target? If this is within the scope of
Fedora, it may not be of much use to external developers as Fedora
packages may have patches.
This aims at being platform independent, for the main features, i.e. jar/class check. But pkgdiff would be specific to
Fedora.
If it is for Fedora packagers only, it means that the packager will have
to know everything that their package uses, which may not always be the
case.
Maintaining the integrity of such a database would also mean integration
with Koji so that no one can upload some locally built package with the
same version as in Koji and pollute the DB with bad data.
Rather than maintain a database right away, for a first step, how about
making it so that the user can provide rpm for package X, rpm version 1
of dependency Y and rpm version 2 of the same dependency, and then find
out what X uses from version 1 of Y and make sure it is in version 2?
This can be done as a standalone tool and would also lay some of the
groundwork for AutoQA in the future.
Makes sense.
Please also keep Jigsaw[1] in mind when designing this (just from a design
perspective) as it will significantly change how Java handles dependencies.
1: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jigsaw/
There are some updates.
Some time before, Christopher O' Brein released Python-Javaclass [A] that now has switches{for json} and
most of the functionality i previously listed.
So, my focus changes more over to feature additions to python-javaclass[A], and addressing breakage issues
Listing a few of the breakage issues here:
1. Refactoring
2. Java-Compilation version
ex.
jar X, depends on jar Y which was compiled previously and now with some incompatible environments
3.Java VM Versions {Code intended for}
4. Transitive Dependencies in jars
A<->B<->C
and their incompatibility
5. Scanning the whole hierarchy for class base
6. Change of method signature, which implies same meaning, but has actually changed
ex
string arrays < - > varags
and many more.
I would now target feature additions:
* Address breakages
* Package python-java
* koji integration/ the DB for jar/rpm versions
* Create other switches{xml/html, etc}
* Provide a Web-Solution
I would like to invite any important features I should be considering.
Cheers,
Deepak
> * Generate outputs of comparison{in different forms json,xml,etc} that
> could be further parsed for other purposes
> * Generate Web-View of the same
>
> Some of the use-cases suggested for these are as below
>
> Quoting Stanislav
>
> "
> I envision following use cases:
> 1. packagers will run this on new release of upstream jar, and old
> release of upstream jar, compare results and decide how to proceed
>
> 2. generate a big database of comparison data for a lot of different
> versions of various projects/jars where developers can go and see
> the stuff without actually running the tool themselves
>
> 3. [possibly in the far future] runs by automatic quality control
> tools such as AutoQA that would prevent an update to a package in a
> released version of distribution that would break compatibility.
> "
>
> So,
>
> what I would try and target more in {the very small 3 months of} GSoC
> ,is to first develop a base solution that does
> proper analysis and breakage detection at singular unit of jar/build
> environment.
> After a good base try and handle as many features suggested above, in
> future.
>
> I would like hear your thoughts/criticisms, to help me identify any
> other approaches.
>
> Cheers
>
> [1]
> .2FABI_changes_checker
> [2]
> [3]+91-8149-204995
>
> References
>
> 1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Summer_coding_ideas_for_2012#Java_API.2FABI_changes_checker
> 2. http://ispras.linuxbase.org/index.php/Java_API_Compliance_Checker
> 3. tel:%2B91-8149-204995
References:
> --
> java-devel mailing list
> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel