Solr
  1. Solr
  2. SOLR-2042

fix woodstox dependencies in solr branch_3x

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 3.1
    • Fix Version/s: 3.1, 4.0-ALPHA
    • Component/s: Build
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      See SOLR-981, the woodstox dependency should use a groupId of org.codehaus.woodstox and not woodstox

      Also, exclude the stax:stax-api dependency in favor of the org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-stax-api_1.0_spec dependency as per http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/f02b22dc9d7848/replace_stax_api_with_geronimo_stax_woodstox#bd9168d12ef5b637

      1. SOLR-2042.patch
        1 kB
        Drew Farris
      2. SOLR-2042-no-stax.patch
        2 kB
        Ryan McKinley

        Activity

        Hide
        Grant Ingersoll added a comment -

        Thanks, Drew. Fixed on trunk and 3.x

        Show
        Grant Ingersoll added a comment - Thanks, Drew. Fixed on trunk and 3.x
        Hide
        Ryan McKinley added a comment -

        Since trunk is on java 1.6, we do not any stax dependencies.

        Show
        Ryan McKinley added a comment - Since trunk is on java 1.6, we do not any stax dependencies.
        Hide
        Yonik Seeley added a comment -

        Ah, good point. We should investigate at least removing the stax-api.
        We could remove the implementation as well (woodstox) but we should do performance tests before doing so.
        http://www.mail-archive.com/users@cxf.apache.org/msg12750.html

        Show
        Yonik Seeley added a comment - Ah, good point. We should investigate at least removing the stax-api. We could remove the implementation as well (woodstox) but we should do performance tests before doing so. http://www.mail-archive.com/users@cxf.apache.org/msg12750.html
        Hide
        Ryan McKinley added a comment -

        interesting – i wonder if you have to do anything special to get it to use the different implementation? is just having it in the classpath enough?

        I made an independent ticket for this SOLR-2054

        Show
        Ryan McKinley added a comment - interesting – i wonder if you have to do anything special to get it to use the different implementation? is just having it in the classpath enough? I made an independent ticket for this SOLR-2054
        Hide
        Grant Ingersoll added a comment -

        Bulk close for 3.1.0 release

        Show
        Grant Ingersoll added a comment - Bulk close for 3.1.0 release

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Drew Farris
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development