HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty #131

NihalJain · 2025-03-11T20:13:40Z

This PR adds a new set of modules which we will need for Jetty 12 migration. The code has been modularised into 3 modules:

hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core: Contains shaded jetty 12 core jars
hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8: Contains shaded jetty EE8 specific jars

So basically:

Branches which want to consume EE8 may need to add hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core and hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in their dependency replacing the former hbase-shaded-jetty
Branches which want to consume EE9/EE10 may need to add a new module for same in hbase-thirdparty in future

NihalJain · 2025-03-11T20:13:51Z

Refer https://stackoverflow.com/questions/77007560/missing-jetty-servlet-12-0-0-dependency

NihalJain · 2025-03-27T12:53:53Z

hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8/pom.xml

+ */
+
+
+  ON MVN COMPILE NOT WORKING


Do we need to copy this header? this file is copy of original jetty module

stoty · 2025-03-27T13:13:14Z

I am not sure about the name, but jetty12 wouldn't be great either.
Whether to use the same package for relocation is another question.
I guess that importing two different relocated jetty versions is not something that we want support, so re-using the package name is fine.

NihalJain · 2025-03-27T13:18:50Z

I am not sure about the name, but jetty12 wouldn't be great either.

Yes hence thought to create env specific names.

I guess that importing two different relocated jetty versions is not something that we want support, so re-using the package name is fine

Yes this is a fair concern. Although, we would not want to have shaded jetty9 in our classpath given we rely on shaded jetty12-eeX. But I am afraid what if hadoop timeline service or something else brings it in indirectly.?

stoty · 2025-03-27T13:31:33Z

I am not sure about the name, but jetty12 wouldn't be great either.

Yes hence thought to create env specific names.

IUC since the eeX stuff is in separate packages, we could add any or all ee specification modules.
If we keep the ee8 name, then migrate to ee9/10 for jakarta, then the module/artifact name will be misleading.
I would rather add the additional eeX modules to existing jetty thirdparty tha duplicate everything for each one.

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I guess that importing two different relocated jetty versions is not something that we want support, so re-using the package name is fine

Yes this is a fair concern. Although, we would not want to have shaded jetty9 in our classpath if with have jetty12-eeX, but I am afraid what if hadoop timeline service or something else brings it in indirectly.?

Ideally, thirdparty netty shouldn't be brought in by the hbase client. ( I have not checked if that's true)
Anything expecting to run in the master/coprocessor JVMs shouldn also not be depending on thirdparty.

NihalJain · 2025-03-27T13:34:09Z

IUC since the eeX stuff is in separate packages, we could add any or all ee specification modules.
If we keep the ee8 name, then migrate to ee9/10 for jakarta, then the module/artifact name will be misleading.
I would rather add the additional eeX modules to existing jetty thirdparty tha duplicate everything for each one.

Exactly that is the plan. Please refer https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29224

Phase 2:

Add Jetty 12 with EE9 to hbase-thirdparty and jersey 3. And may be some other artifacts (not sure at this point)

Next consume this version of hbase-thirdparty, move to jetty 12 with EE9, bump jakarta servlet to 5.x / 6.x, tomcat to > 10.x / 11.x and migrate all the dependencies and code to jakarta namespace

Blockers?? Hadoop AuthenticationFilter dependent and related code need to be either shaded to move from javax to
jakarta, or we would need to wait for hadoop for move to jakarta. (In my rough analysis, I have identified this till now, > > when we attempt it might be more stuff)

Test and verify everything is working as expected

NihalJain · 2025-03-27T13:38:37Z

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly but we may need all versions of jetty to exist:

hbase-shaded-jetty: for <= branch-2.6
hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8: possibly for branch-2, if we decide to backport retaining javax namespace
hbase-shaded-jetty-ee9: For branch-3+ with jakarta namespace change

Hence created a new module for ee8 as first step.

stoty · 2025-03-27T13:57:43Z

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly but we may need all versions of jetty to exist:

hbase-shaded-jetty: for <= branch-2.6

hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8: possibly for branch-2, if we decide to backport retaining javax namespace

hbase-shaded-jetty-ee9: For branch-3+ with jakarta namespace change

Hence created a new module for ee8 as first step.

AFAICT ee8 and ee9 does not have to be a separate project.
IUC the different modules can co-exist because they are under different package names.

So we could maintain a single hbase-shaded-netty-whatever package, that includes ee8 for now, and we can add ee9 later (while retaining ee8 for older hbase branches).

NihalJain · 2025-03-27T14:20:34Z

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly but we may need all versions of jetty to exist:

hbase-shaded-jetty: for <= branch-2.6

hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8: possibly for branch-2, if we decide to backport retaining javax namespace

hbase-shaded-jetty-ee9: For branch-3+ with jakarta namespace change

Hence created a new module for ee8 as first step.

AFAICT ee8 and ee9 does not have to be a separate project. IUC the different modules can co-exist because they are under different package names.

So we could maintain a single hbase-shaded-netty-whatever package, that includes ee8 for now, and we can add ee9 later (while retaining ee8 for older hbase branches).

Okay got your point. Agreed, created 2 modules as we have a javax dependency inside thirdparty jetty (not sure why), copied same inside new module. If we can build without this bundled, then we should be good maybe.

NihalJain · 2025-03-27T14:45:35Z

So we could maintain a single hbase-shaded-netty-whatever package, that includes ee8 for now, and we can add ee9 later (while retaining ee8 for older hbase branches).

Updated PR with both EE8 + EE9 changes (for testing purpose), will rerun UTs locally and update. Also renamed hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8 to hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus for time being

hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus/pom.xml

stoty · 2025-03-28T06:02:53Z

Do you think it would make sense to split this up, so that we have a base shaded jetty package, and separate jee8 and jee9 shaded packages ?

NihalJain · 2025-03-28T06:22:03Z

Okay got your point. Agreed, created 2 modules as we have a javax dependency inside thirdparty jetty (not sure why), copied same inside new module. If we can build without this bundled, then we should be good maybe.

Updated PR with both EE8 + EE9 changes (for testing purpose), will rerun UTs locally and update. Also renamed hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8 to hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus for time being

I ran the UTs with the apache/hbase#6783 and all tests passed locally. We are good with a single package for eeX. So javax dependency was indeed redundant.

Should I retain the ee9 change here or revert? WDYT?

Do you think it would make sense to split this up, so that we have a base shaded jetty package, and separate jee8 and jee9 shaded packages ?

In HBase it may not help as our jetty-core and eeX specific imports happen together. I mean we don't seem to have an module which only depends on jetty but not eeX. We would eventually end up with including both dependencies to our module pom's.

pom.xml

stoty · 2025-03-28T06:27:30Z

My use case would be for example:

Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules
HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

NihalJain · 2025-03-28T06:32:08Z

My use case would be for example:

Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules

HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

Ah yes we could definitely save a few MBs here and avoid bundling redundant code. Just to be clear, we are suggesting to break into modules as below:

Jetty-12-plus
Jetty-12-plus-EE8
Jetty-12-plus-EE10 etc

So basically fall back to the initial approach of this PR, but maybe a new module for base? Right?

stoty · 2025-03-28T06:36:26Z

My use case would be for example:

Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules

HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

Ah yes we could definitely save a few MBs here and avoid bundling redundant code. Just to be clear, we are suggesting to break into modules as below:

Jetty-12-plus

Jetty-12-plus-EE8

Jetty-12-plus-EE10 etc

So basically fall back to the initial approach of this PR, but maybe a new module for base? Right?

Right

NihalJain · 2025-03-28T06:37:57Z

My use case would be for example:

Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules

HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

Ah yes we could definitely save a few MBs here and avoid bundling redundant code. Just to be clear, we are suggesting to break into modules as below:

Jetty-12-plus

Jetty-12-plus-EE8

Jetty-12-plus-EE10 etc

So basically fall back to the initial approach of this PR, but maybe a new module for base? Right?

Right

Cool sounds good to me, should I update the PR with the suggestion? or wait sometime for what others opine? I am good either ways, simple change.

stoty · 2025-03-28T06:38:50Z

If you agree, then I think updating it now would let the others see what our current best approach is.

Apache-HBase · 2025-04-25T14:40:21Z

🎊 +1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	1m 3s	Docker mode activated.
		_ Prechecks _
+1 💚	dupname	0m 0s	No case conflicting files found.
+1 💚	@author	0m 0s	The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️	test4tests	0m 0s	The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
		_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚	mvninstall	1m 3s	master passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 22s	master passed
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 11s	master passed
-0 ⚠️	patch	1m 41s	Used diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
		_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗	mvndep	0m 12s	Maven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚	mvninstall	1m 19s	the patch passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 38s	the patch passed
+1 💚	javac	0m 38s	the patch passed
+1 💚	whitespace	0m 0s	The patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚	xml	0m 3s	The patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 24s	the patch passed
		_ Other Tests _
+1 💚	unit	0m 7s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 8s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 51s	root in the patch passed.
+1 💚	asflicense	0m 22s	The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
		6m 52s

Subsystem	Report/Notes
Docker	ClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/15/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR	#131
Optional Tests	dupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
uname	Linux 236c5f739ca2 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build tool	maven
git revision	master / `5bb7b54`
Default Java	Temurin-1.8.0_442-b06
Test Results	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/15/testReport/
Max. process+thread count	384 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modules	C: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/15/console
versions	git=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

Apache-HBase · 2025-04-30T06:25:12Z

🎊 +1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	1m 6s	Docker mode activated.
		_ Prechecks _
+1 💚	dupname	0m 0s	No case conflicting files found.
+1 💚	@author	0m 0s	The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️	test4tests	0m 0s	The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
		_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚	mvninstall	0m 59s	master passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 16s	master passed
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 9s	master passed
-0 ⚠️	patch	1m 29s	Used diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
		_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗	mvndep	0m 9s	Maven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚	mvninstall	1m 1s	the patch passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 28s	the patch passed
+1 💚	javac	0m 28s	the patch passed
+1 💚	whitespace	0m 0s	The patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚	xml	0m 2s	The patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 19s	the patch passed
		_ Other Tests _
+1 💚	unit	0m 6s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 5s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 53s	root in the patch passed.
+1 💚	asflicense	0m 17s	The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
		6m 9s

Subsystem	Report/Notes
Docker	ClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/16/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR	#131
Optional Tests	dupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
uname	Linux b14f490c4cc5 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build tool	maven
git revision	master / `e545fe1`
Default Java	Temurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Results	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/16/testReport/
Max. process+thread count	384 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modules	C: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/16/console
versions	git=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

pom.xml

Apache-HBase · 2025-04-30T06:49:51Z

🎊 +1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	0m 27s	Docker mode activated.
		_ Prechecks _
+1 💚	dupname	0m 0s	No case conflicting files found.
+1 💚	@author	0m 0s	The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️	test4tests	0m 0s	The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
		_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚	mvninstall	0m 51s	master passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 16s	master passed
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 9s	master passed
-0 ⚠️	patch	1m 21s	Used diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
		_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗	mvndep	0m 10s	Maven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚	mvninstall	1m 2s	the patch passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 28s	the patch passed
+1 💚	javac	0m 28s	the patch passed
+1 💚	whitespace	0m 0s	The patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚	xml	0m 2s	The patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 18s	the patch passed
		_ Other Tests _
+1 💚	unit	0m 6s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 6s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 54s	root in the patch passed.
+1 💚	asflicense	0m 19s	The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
		5m 20s

Subsystem	Report/Notes
Docker	ClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/17/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR	#131
Optional Tests	dupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
uname	Linux 4aab8c9ded0f 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build tool	maven
git revision	master / `e545fe1`
Default Java	Temurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Results	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/17/testReport/
Max. process+thread count	397 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modules	C: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/17/console
versions	git=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

NihalJain · 2025-05-09T11:45:09Z

Hi @stoty Should I go ahead and merge this one? Or should wait a few more days for more eyes?

Will go ahead and merge this today.? could not get any more reviews here.

pom.xml

NihalJain · 2025-05-09T11:52:04Z

Bumped to jetty 12.0.20, pending CI

Apache-HBase · 2025-05-09T11:59:47Z

💔 -1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	0m 0s	Docker mode activated.
-1 ❌	patch	0m 3s	#131 does not apply to master. Rebase required? Wrong Branch? See https://yetus.apache.org/documentation/in-progress/precommit-patchnames for help.

Subsystem	Report/Notes
GITHUB PR	#131
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/18/console
versions	git=2.17.1
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

Apache-HBase · 2025-05-09T12:59:59Z

💔 -1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	0m 0s	Docker mode activated.
-1 ❌	patch	0m 3s	#131 does not apply to master. Rebase required? Wrong Branch? See https://yetus.apache.org/documentation/in-progress/precommit-patchnames for help.

Subsystem	Report/Notes
GITHUB PR	#131
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/19/console
versions	git=2.17.1
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

… otherwise getting error when including core into sub module

…dules

Bump to latest jetty

… - Discrepancy between Jetty 9 and Jetty 12 when setting the base resource to a path containing ..

Apache-HBase · 2025-05-09T13:09:55Z

🎊 +1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	0m 59s	Docker mode activated.
		_ Prechecks _
+1 💚	dupname	0m 0s	No case conflicting files found.
+1 💚	@author	0m 0s	The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️	test4tests	0m 0s	The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
		_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚	mvninstall	0m 46s	master passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 11s	master passed
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 7s	master passed
-0 ⚠️	patch	1m 10s	Used diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
		_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗	mvndep	0m 9s	Maven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚	mvninstall	0m 52s	the patch passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 23s	the patch passed
+1 💚	javac	0m 23s	the patch passed
+1 💚	whitespace	0m 0s	The patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚	xml	0m 2s	The patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 16s	the patch passed
		_ Other Tests _
+1 💚	unit	0m 5s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 5s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 45s	root in the patch passed.
+1 💚	asflicense	0m 15s	The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
		5m 6s

Subsystem	Report/Notes
Docker	ClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/20/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR	#131
Optional Tests	dupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
uname	Linux c775745476df 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build tool	maven
git revision	master / `e545fe1`
Default Java	Temurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Results	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/20/testReport/
Max. process+thread count	383 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modules	C: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/20/console
versions	git=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

Apache-HBase · 2025-05-09T13:18:49Z

🎊 +1 overall

Vote	Subsystem	Runtime	Comment
+0 🆗	reexec	0m 26s	Docker mode activated.
		_ Prechecks _
+1 💚	dupname	0m 0s	No case conflicting files found.
+1 💚	@author	0m 0s	The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️	test4tests	0m 0s	The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
		_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚	mvninstall	0m 33s	master passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 13s	master passed
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 6s	master passed
-0 ⚠️	patch	0m 56s	Used diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
		_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗	mvndep	0m 6s	Maven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚	mvninstall	0m 50s	the patch passed
+1 💚	compile	0m 23s	the patch passed
+1 💚	javac	0m 23s	the patch passed
+1 💚	whitespace	0m 0s	The patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚	xml	0m 2s	The patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚	javadoc	0m 16s	the patch passed
		_ Other Tests _
+1 💚	unit	0m 5s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 5s	hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚	unit	0m 43s	root in the patch passed.
+1 💚	asflicense	0m 15s	The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
		4m 11s

Subsystem	Report/Notes
Docker	ClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/21/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR	#131
Optional Tests	dupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
uname	Linux 0f3072bbe0d5 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build tool	maven
git revision	master / `e545fe1`
Default Java	Temurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Results	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/21/testReport/
Max. process+thread count	400 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modules	C: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console output	https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/21/console
versions	git=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered by	Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

…rty (apache#131)" This reverts commit 6016e75.

(#131)" (#140) This reverts commit 6016e75. Signed-off-by: Duo Zhang <zhangduo@apache.org>

…che#131) This change adds a new set of modules which we will need for Jetty 12 migration. The code has been modularised into following modules: - `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core`: Contains shaded jetty 12 core jars - `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8`: Contains shaded jetty EE8 specific jars So basically: - Branches which want to consume EE8 may need to add `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core` and `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8` in their dependency replacing the former `hbase-shaded-jetty` - Branches which want to consume EE9/EE10 may need to add a new module for same in `hbase-thirdparty` in future Signed-off-by: Istvan Toth <stoty@apache.org>

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

NihalJain mentioned this pull request Mar 11, 2025

HBASE-29226 Migrate to jetty 12 with EE8 and bump java servlet to 4.0.1 apache/hbase#6783

Merged

NihalJain marked this pull request as draft March 11, 2025 20:31

NihalJain force-pushed the jetty12 branch from b6e7465 to aedcb48 Compare March 27, 2025 12:06

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

NihalJain changed the title ~~[WIP] Add a jetty 12 module with EE8~~ HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty Mar 27, 2025

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

NihalJain marked this pull request as ready for review March 27, 2025 12:55

NihalJain force-pushed the jetty12 branch from aedcb48 to a79571d Compare March 27, 2025 13:05

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus/pom.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

NihalJain force-pushed the jetty12 branch from 939d9b5 to a9bbd87 Compare March 27, 2025 14:53

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

pom.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

NihalJain commented Apr 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

pom.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

NihalJain commented May 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

pom.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

NihalJain added 12 commits May 9, 2025 18:33

HBASE-XXXX Add a jetty 12 module with EE8

799b0c8

HBASE-XXXX Add a jetty 12 module with EE8

57e7fd5

Make changes to test EE8 + EE9 in single module

08307f0

Break into core, core + EE8 and core + EE9; Also bump shade plugin as…

03408a5

… otherwise getting error when including core into sub module

Use excludes during shading to remove duplicate core's code in EEX mo…

42fa791

…dules

Add all core deps as transitive in eeX and fix sl4j exclusions

c1df751

Remove redundant exclusion for deps with provided scope

9115dd9

Rename property jetty12.version to jetty-12-plus.version

164165d

Remove EE9 demo module

f823cae

Fix typo

912107f

Update pom.xml

2286207

Bump to latest jetty

Bump to jetty 12.0.20 which brings in fix for jetty/jetty.project#12958…

3180b12

… - Discrepancy between Jetty 9 and Jetty 12 when setting the base resource to a path containing ..

NihalJain force-pushed the jetty12 branch from 3586437 to 3180b12 Compare May 9, 2025 13:03

NihalJain merged commit 6016e75 into apache:master May 9, 2025
1 check passed

NihalJain added a commit to NihalJain/hbase-thirdparty that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025

Revert "HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdpa…

b8db190

…rty (apache#131)" This reverts commit 6016e75.

NihalJain mentioned this pull request May 26, 2025

Revert "HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdpa… #140

Merged

NihalJain added a commit that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025

Revert "HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty

00249ba

(#131)" (#140) This reverts commit 6016e75. Signed-off-by: Duo Zhang <zhangduo@apache.org>

HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty #131

HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty #131

Uh oh!

Conversation

NihalJain commented Mar 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 11, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

This comment was marked as outdated.

NihalJain Mar 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

stoty commented Mar 27, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

stoty commented Mar 27, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

stoty commented Mar 27, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

stoty commented Mar 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

stoty commented Mar 28, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

stoty commented Mar 28, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025

Uh oh!

stoty commented Mar 28, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Apache-HBase commented Apr 25, 2025

Uh oh!

Apache-HBase commented Apr 30, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Apache-HBase commented Apr 30, 2025

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented May 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NihalJain commented May 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Apache-HBase commented May 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Apache-HBase commented May 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Apache-HBase commented May 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Apache-HBase commented May 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

NihalJain commented Mar 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain Mar 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

stoty commented Mar 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading