nu.xom.MultipleParentException: Child already has a parent with newer OPSIN about oscar4 HOT 6 CLOSED

from oscar4.

I can't seem to reproduce this; the master is at OPSIN 2.4.0 and it is passing the CI

from oscar4.

Indeed, master works fine with OPSIN v2.4.0, thanks for pointing this out! I was trying to use OSCAR4 v4.2.2 tag. Sorry for the noise. By the way, are there any plans for a release?

from oscar4.

Hi Andrius,

My role on this project has been very much an ad-hoc caretaker; I am not a core developer. A few years ago I cleaned up the project so that it could be deployed on Maven Central, since I had been making use of the code in another project and, also, I consider deployment to Maven Central as a form of proper archiving and facilitates other people using the code in an easy manner. As far as I know, OSCAR4, is really not being developed, but it may be possible to roll and deploy a release based on the current master tree.

There are a few issues, though.

The parent pom requires 1.5 bytecode to be generated and I overrode that more recently in the master since my JDK 11 would not generate 1.5 bytecode anymore. This is hacky and essentially one should fix the parent pom. Secondly, the master currently builds 1.6 bytecode and there are currently dependencies that have bytecode later than that:

[INFO] Restricted to JDK 1.6 yet commons-io:commons-io:jar:2.6:compile contains org/apache/commons/io/comparator/DirectoryFileComparator.class targeted to JDK 1.7
[INFO] Restricted to JDK 1.6 yet com.google.guava:guava:jar:24.1.1-jre:compile contains com/google/common/annotations/Beta.class targeted to JDK 8
[INFO] Restricted to JDK 1.6 yet com.ibm.icu:icu4j:jar:64.2:compile contains com/ibm/icu/impl/Assert.class targeted to JDK 1.7

Recently, a newer parent pom that generates 1.8 bytecode has been prepared, hence it should be possible to switch to using this; it will also resolve the issues above. I just need to finish up some maven-enforcer-plugin tweaks to catch this issue happening in the future.

However, I am not sure as to release this as 4.3.0 or 5.0.0 since I am jumping three JDK versions, with reference to 4.2.2. My gut feeling is 5.0.0 since something major is happening and I should signal that in the version number, but if I release a 5.0.0, should the project be renamed to OSCAR5? I am not sure what to do and most of the original developers are long gone....

from oscar4.

@mjw99 I am happy to see OSCAR4 build and work as expected - many thanks for keeping it in shape! I also think that OSCAR4 should retain its current name (ending in 4) even when its major version is bumped to 5 or more.

@petermr Glad to hear about AMI3 achievements! I definitely need to catch up with developments there.

Shall we close this issue?

from oscar4.

@merkys I am hitting various issues whilst trying to deploy. Whilst I am working through them, it would great if you could fix #2 by forking, fixing and then issuing a PR. You can also see the errors here

from oscar4.