Community
Participate
Working Groups
A quick look at the latest development version of AspectJ reveals a lot of files (.java, .aj, .html, ...) in aspectjtools.jar and asepctjweaver.jar which is built from it. This hints at a build process problem that may result in shipping what we shouldn't! It's also confusing for users and consumers like AJDT because there _are_ non-Java files like the messages properties that are required.
Not true of AspectJ-1.5.0_M4 or aspectj-DEVELOPMENT-20051014210353.jar. (What's with all these UTR build bugs?)
Matthew - can you check if this is fixed to your satisfaction in recent distributions?
It's much better. There are still a bunch of html files in org.apache.bcel and org.eclipse.jdt as well as GIFs. Not sure if we should be including these.
Build related - we should police what gets into these jars at build/packaging time.
Solution may lie with Bug 113948.
Why isn't this bug closed? Exactly what files are included that shouldn't be? When jars are assembled, the library jars included are not filtered (on the assumption the authors know what they're doing), and otherwise the included/excluded non-.class files are specified in Builder.properties: ----------------- # files copied during module jar assembly resource.pattern=**/*.txt,**/*.rsc,**/*.gif,**/*.properties,**/*.xml,**/*.dtd # files not filtered when copied during product assembly binarySource.pattern=**/*.rsc,**/*.gif,**/*.jar,**/*.zip ----------------- We can update the build to police library jars as well (or at least JDT which is under our control), with these or other patterns. It would be more work, but doable, to have jar/input-specific patterns.
The report has not been closed because the bug has not been fixed. Looking in AspectJ 1.5.2 Final I see in both aspectjweaver.jar and aspectjtools.jar several HTML files like org/apache/bcel/classfile/package.html In aspectjtools.jar several GIF files like: org/aspectj/ajde/strucure/resources/adivice.gif Also ant_tasks/resources-ant.jar Now there may be a good reason for their inclusion (although I fail to see one for the HTML files) and the situation was much worse when I open the report. I have 2 reasons to be concerned: 1. JAR bloat; 2. Unexpected files in the deliverable are symptomatic of a deeper problem. If the files are removed or their presence justified I will close the bug.
So can you specify or categorize which files should go? The ajde gif files are needed for the command-line distribution, but I'd agree that unnecessary files (however defined) from both bcel and ant stuff could be trimmed. Anything else?
Still not sure why this is still open. There has never been a build process problem; we police what gets in for our stuff, but include everything in the input jars, on the assumption that whoever creates the input jars knows what they are doing. If not - e.g., it seems correct to pull out the package.html files, but I'm not sure about the J2SE profiles or ant_tasks/resources-ant.jar from jdtcore-for-aspectj.jar - then let's fix those jars. If you want the build process to police the jars, then you'll have to come up with a list/rule for doing so. Removing package.html is the only general rule I can think of, but again it seems like a much cleaner rule to say that what's in the input jars is delivered.
