Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: tony mancill Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.java Subject: bcel-6.0~rc4 Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 06:20:01 +0200 Message-ID: X-Original-To: Debian Java X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-java-request@lists.debian.org Thu Sep 3 04:10:08 2015 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.9 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, FOURLA=0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, ONEWORD=2, PGPSIGNATURE=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -5 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="S79aHXce6o6cHSkpnqoKFCBFjDIdHs8pF" X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18617 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/55E7C805.5070503@debian.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 78 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 21:09:41 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: <55E7C805.5070503@debian.org> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.java:8303 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --S79aHXce6o6cHSkpnqoKFCBFjDIdHs8pF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Java Team, I have packaged the latest upstream of bcel and am preparing to upload it to experimental to aid with transitioning its reverse dependencies. The following is from the upstream changelog: > Compatibility with 5.2 > ---------------------- >=20 > Binary compatible - No >=20 > Source compatible - Yes, sort of; > - Maven coordinates update: > org.apache.bcel:bcel:5.2 -> org.apache.commons:commons-bcel6:6.0 >=20 > - Rename package imports: > org.apache.bcel -> org.apache.commons.bcel6 >=20 > - The org.apache.commons.bcel6.classfile.Visitor interface has been en= hanced with > additional methods. If you implemented it directly instead of extend= ing > the EmptyVisitor class you'll have to implement the new methods. >=20 > Semantic compatible - Yes, except: > - BCEL handles new attributes such as code annotations that could only= > be processed by implementing a custom AttributeReader in the previou= s > versions. Code relying on this behavior will have to be adjusted sin= ce > the AttributeReader will no longer be called in these cases. What I wanted to ask the list is whether this new version should include a renamed binary package libcommons-bcel-java instead of libbcel-java, primarily because the jar name has changed from bcel.jar to commons-bcel6.jar. I assume it's worthwhile to stick with the upstream coordinates and conventions unless there is some pressing need to deviate. (At the moment, I'm considering uploading the new version to experimental with the same binary package name, but with the new maven coordinates and new JAR name.) Thoughts? Thank you, tony --S79aHXce6o6cHSkpnqoKFCBFjDIdHs8pF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJV58gOAAoJECHSBYmXSz6WEhQP/0+yR1zNF1qAZ3rEFWCt6OiE 4XvzsU2oNPXQ4+pd62nRkJrjH00xcsTJxjCjCxMAohs2Lc8vOfhPCWYCRBQzTIjB ffDu0c7NZhDO2xRc/5xRhierVcfj/v1+OkE4b07mhyWjW6jtOXhpP3vIMdBDdN8H chw6NTvzPOBUNpR8z841dq7RGZMPcCpPOLkIqaT/domzM2Vyd95vC3MeppSGD8qh p/YCH57E2Yq9pM/hqVdJHy/tpqRdNyyfhCwYqooHDJgA1FJQyLnO0UungXOwrp3i IL8rWoqtt2gTLOJ0llKbgXdI4tgSpRWHCrxttvIkK5pnl+pEnlfluwtQnSc6U/nM ZfDTN4VPZJ24SB+aTY4LXyVAP6VphQJC67pQxq0ArGR0s1ylTRUjoMineBYy0sgs a0ctSnQul9k/PWSvHLGTw70pasdf1uUoxgS9lSxTvDOAtQ3CM8go5YRNl4UmuJTY zWnYkPxM9KzEDaCXGl2mDfwpFVBvwyd71X+vtldJcq92wK+uuTzkVLZzF/WMrHwe 6QmcyoecN0u3WCcA346mg2P2HhyCMb+o9eyLQZsCqWhbytZtaBOc2Kvd5Gt72FaR g6zPtUSGKHpCk48c5VCMJ3yi+baZpQA3u+Us9nabhU4Ulw5mVp2oQMB4/12TfPkQ h2er+BGuuYSoPSZ5qHFp =N4O+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --S79aHXce6o6cHSkpnqoKFCBFjDIdHs8pF--