dev@glassfish.java.net

Re: [v3] Stricter JAR visibility requirements in EE 6 vs GlassFish v2 behavior

From: Hong Zhang <Hong.Zhang_at_Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:20:25 -0400

Have we decided on the flag name for this? As the purpose of the flag in
this case is mainly maintaining backward compatibility with prior
releases, I think it makes sense to use a more generic flag like
"compatibility" as Sahoo suggested so we can use the same flag for other
compatibility related things...


> Finally, on a second thought, I think we can rename the deploy option
> from "jarVisibility" to something like "compatibility" so that we can
> use the same flag any other compatibility issues. Then, we don't need
> yet another option when move to next version. We can just have
> --compatibility=v3 while running in v3++.



Jerome Dochez wrote:

>
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Roberto Chinnici wrote:
>
>> Jerome Dochez wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:07 AM, Sahoo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jerome Dochez wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> if you are not deterred with option 1 then I think we should just
>>>>> carry on like this. This is the safest option for our users, and
>>>>> we should print a Warning so next release we remote the flag and
>>>>> feature.
>>>>
>>>> Jerome,
>>>>
>>>> Did you mean option 1 or 2? Unless I am missing something, option
>>>> #1 can lead to broken applications after upgrade. Is it safer than
>>>> option #2?
>>>>
>>> yes of course, I meant using the flag.
>>
>>
>> So this only applies to applications already deployed when we
>> upgrade, and for all other apps, we follow EE 6 by default and if
>> your app breaks you need to specify the flag?
>
> yes.
>
>> I'd be OK with that, I guess, but what makes you think you'll ever
>> be able to remove the flag?
>> That would imply that one day an app that ran on v2 (by default) and
>> on v3 (with the flag) will absolutely not run unmodified on v4.
>
> that's correct if we choose to remove the flag, but at least the
> upgrade from v2 to v3 gave a warning to the user.
>
>>
>> --Roberto
>>
>>> thanks for catching this.
>>>
>>> Jerome
>>>
>>>> By 1 & 2, I mean the following (taken from your earlier email):
>>>> /1. we don't run the upgrade redeployment with the flag and
>>>> applications that were not flagged as using a deprecated or
>>>> incorrect feature in V1/V2 will fail to be upgraded correctly.
>>>> 2. we run with the flag which mean that we automatically upgrade
>>>> and run the already deployed applications in an incompatible mode.
>>>> /
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sahoo
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>