Conversation

Notices

1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:01:08 EDT musicman
   unclear why I got a content warning. Are people offended by errors? https://pastebin.com/0KnYrMf1
   1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:02:20 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      maybe because it has the word model?
      1. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:08:00 EDT lnxw48a1

         in reply to
         @musicman Perhaps. Spammers try to use pastebins to host text links to their content, so maybe “model” is perceived as “$5 for pics of nekkid model”.
   2. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:08:36 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      well, let's see if the old code compiles in maven. If so, then I can, in theory, just change the one file...
      
      but of course, the compile fails as I type...
      1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:09:19 EDT musicman

         in reply to
         actually, I think it is failing to compile because of the exact file I want to change (well, or I could compile with an older java...)
         1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:10:46 EDT musicman

            in reply to
            sanity check with Java 8...
            1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:13:57 EDT musicman

               in reply to
               what do you know. I know things!
               1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:14:15 EDT musicman

                  in reply to
                  it's rare, but it's nice when it happens
                  1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:14:51 EDT musicman

                     in reply to
                     well, I know it compiles in Java 8 and not Java 11. I don't know that changing the one file will get it to compile in Java 11.
   3. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:10:58 EDT lnxw48a1

      in reply to
      @musicman Anyway, that build failure may be the reason there’s no recent release.
   4. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:22:35 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      well, the fix builds in Java 8, so yay for that
      1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Thursday, 08-Oct-2020 17:33:57 EDT musicman

         in reply to
         hmm, this compile error is in javadocs generation. Do I even need that?
   5. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Friday, 09-Oct-2020 11:47:16 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      to the point about command line flags though...
      
      maybe this is moving things forward? https://nu.federati.net/url/276283
   6. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Friday, 09-Oct-2020 17:33:00 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      I found the below by running the -X flag, but I have no idea where this config is. Is it embedded in a dependency jar or something? I def do not want max JdkVersion 1.7.
      
      
      [DEBUG] -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      [DEBUG] Goal: org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin:3.0.0-M1:enforce (display-info)
      [DEBUG] Style: Regular
      [DEBUG] Configuration: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
      <configuration>
      <fail default-value="true">${enforcer.fail}</fail>
      <failFast default-value="false">${enforcer.failFast}</failFast>
      <ignoreCache default-value="false">${enforcer.ignoreCache}</ignoreCache>
      <mojoExecution default-value="${mojoExecution}"/>
      <project default-value="${project}"/>
      <rules>
      <requireMavenVersion>
      <version>[3.1.0,)</version>
      <message>3.1.0 required by frontend-maven-plugin at least.</message>
      </requireMavenVersion>
      <requirePluginVersions>
      <banSnapshots>false</banSnapshots>
      </requirePluginVersions>
      <enforceBytecodeVersion>
      <maxJdkVersion>1.7</maxJdkVersion>
      <ignoredScopes>
      <ignoredScope>test</ignoredScope>
      </ignoredScopes>
      1. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Monday, 12-Oct-2020 16:34:37 EDT musicman

         in reply to
         customer is good going back to Java 8, so hard to get anyone's attention about this, but I still don't understand where this maxJdkVersion stuff is coming from. The weirdest thing about it is that it not only compiles, but works in Java 8, so what the hell is this 1.7 stuff even doing?
   7. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Friday, 09-Oct-2020 10:55:06 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      well, I had commented out the xjc-specific stuff, but maybe I need the schemagen-specific stuff
   8. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Friday, 09-Oct-2020 10:54:23 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      ok, might be getting somewhere...
      
      "The OP was talking about the schemagen goal. Note that your approach won't work with Java 11 + because xjc exectuable is removed."
      
      I had been working on the assumption that either was fine. idk the difference between schemagen and xjc...other than this...
   9. musicman (musicman@nu.federati.net)'s status on Friday, 09-Oct-2020 10:31:47 EDT musicman

      in reply to
      And yet, people say they have this working in Java 11. I would really like to see more of their configuration...
      
      [INFO] Restricted to JDK 1.7 yet javax.xml.bind:jaxb-api:jar:2.3.1:compile contains javax/xml/bind/JAXBElement.class targeted to JDK 1.8
      [INFO] Ignoring requireUpperBoundDeps in com.google.guava:guava
      [INFO] Ignoring requireUpperBoundDeps in com.google.code.findbugs:jsr305
      [WARNING] Rule 2: org.apache.maven.plugins.enforcer.EnforceBytecodeVersion failed with message:
      Found Banned Dependency: javax.xml.bind:jaxb-api:jar:2.3.1
      Use 'mvn dependency:tree' to locate the source of the banned dependencies.