Conversation:
Notices
-
unclear why I got a content warning. Are people offended by errors? https://pastebin.com/0KnYrMf1
-
maybe because it has the word model?
-
@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”.
-
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...
-
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...)
-
sanity check with Java 8...
-
@musicman Anyway, that build failure may be the reason there’s no recent release.
-
what do you know. I know things!
-
it's rare, but it's nice when it happens
-
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.
-
well, the fix builds in Java 8, so yay for that
-
hmm, this compile error is in javadocs generation. Do I even need that?
-
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:…
-
@musicman Their configuration and the command and switches they're using to compile.
-
true, though I think it best practice to put everything in the pom.xml
-
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...
-
well, I had commented out the xjc-specific stuff, but maybe I need the schemagen-specific stuff
-
to the point about command line flags though...
maybe this is moving things forward? https://nu.federati.net/url/276283
-
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] Config…
-
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?