Repackage asm

[greenlaw110]

This library use asm 5.1 (at the moment) direclty. However as per http://asm.ow2.org/doc/faq.html#Q15, it suggest that

Tools and frameworks that are using ASM for bytecode processing (e.g. Hibernate, CGLIB, AspectWerkz) should repackage ASM code within their own name space. This can be automated with Jar Jar Links tool.

Here is a real issue caused by ASM library version conflict between sun's jersey and ReflectASM

[NathanSweet]

I tried, jar jar links appears to be broken.

[greenlaw110]

@NathanSweet

Well IDE is your friend, it's very simple to load all ASM code into your ide and run a code refactory to change the package name. You don't really need jarjar to work.

[NathanSweet]

I'd rather modify the built artifact provided by ObjectWeb than repackage it from source each time it needs updating. As you can see in the jarjar issue, I got it to work. Their docs were outdated and their launcher code half wrong.

[greenlaw110]

My approach is to create a separate project that package the asm, and maintain that project including release it as a separate jar in the maven repository.

But anyway it's your call

[magro]

@NathanSweet I guess pom.xml still has to be adjusted to make this work for other users and in the context of releasing to maven, right?!

[NathanSweet]

@magro Yes.

[magro]

We're already building/releasing a shaded jar, creating an additional artifact with a classifier attached. We could use the shading approach and just release the shaded jar instead of using jarjar (not sure how this would be integrated via maven).

[NathanSweet]

Normally I would leave shading to whoever is cobbling together conflicting dependencies, but if the ASM people are saying we should shade their lib and distribute that, then I guess we don't need a non-shaded JAR.

Maven doesn't have to use jar jar, though it's possible. Can we shade it to "com.esotericsoftware.asm"?

Is it a problem for Maven that I use a shaded ASM JAR as a dependency? That means the ReflectASM source is using shaded imports.

[magro]

Can we shade it to "com.esotericsoftware.asm"?

Yes we can. In the PR (#57) I left it unchanged to keep changes as small as possible, but I don't think that changing to "com.esotericsoftware.asm" would break anything (assuming nobody uses the shaded classes of course). What's your motivation btw?

Is it a problem for Maven that I use a shaded ASM JAR as a dependency? That means the ReflectASM source is using shaded imports.

That's the problem, because maven doesn't use the patched asm jar, but the original one as declared as dependency. Therefore compilation fails.