Bug 189791 - org.eclipse.tomcat tolerance set wrong for org.apache.ant plug-in
Summary: org.eclipse.tomcat tolerance set wrong for org.apache.ant plug-in
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: User Assistance (show other bugs)
Version: 3.3   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 critical (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.3 RC3   Edit
Assignee: Adam Archer CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: contributed
: 186079 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-05-29 17:36 EDT by Peter Farrell CLA
Modified: 2007-06-11 10:07 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
cgold: review+
curtispd: review+
dejan: review+


Attachments
Patch (837 bytes, patch)
2007-05-30 09:19 EDT, Adam Archer CLA
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Peter Farrell CLA 2007-05-29 17:36:52 EDT
org.eclipse.tomcat optionally includes org.apache.ant plug-in. This plug-in is in the Eclipse SDK but the issue is that the tolerance in org.eclipse.tomcat is set to low. My tool reports the following:

org.eclipse.tomcat

This bundle optionally requires the existence of the following plug-ins and fragments which were unavailable in the product. A bundle with optional dependencies is resolved even though the optional dependencies themselves are unavailable in the product. 
org.apache.ant version [1.6.5,1.7.0) (version 1.7.0.v200705232135 of bundle org.apache.ant was available in product instead) 

I have Eclipse RC2 installed.
Comment 1 Darin Swanson CLA 2007-05-29 17:49:12 EDT
moving to UA
Comment 2 Chris Goldthorpe CLA 2007-05-29 18:06:14 EDT
UA does not use org.eclipse.tomcat any more but we have not removed it from the build because there are products which still use it (even though the UA team discourages such use). I think we need to widen the tolerance range.

Targeting Eclipse 3.3 RC3. I don't know if this counts as an API change, we should request PMC approval to be on the safe side.

Curtis, Dejan, is there any reason not to make this change?
Comment 3 Curtis d'Entremont CLA 2007-05-29 18:27:39 EDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> I don't know if this counts as an API change

It's definitely not an API change.

> Curtis, Dejan, is there any reason not to make this change?

Peter, can you confirm that by removing the 1.7.0 version restriction, it fixes
the problem? If yes, then we should go ahead with the fix.
Comment 4 Peter Farrell CLA 2007-05-30 09:05:43 EDT
Updating the tolerance would fix the problem. But what are you going to set it to? It seems pretty restrictive at this point. I would suggest a tolerance of [1.6.5,2.0.0). 

I agree this is not an api change in the org.eclipse.tomcat plug-in. It was an api change in the org.apache.ant plug-in. 
Comment 5 Adam Archer CLA 2007-05-30 09:19:26 EDT
Created attachment 69266 [details]
Patch

Changes org.apache.ant tolerance to [1.6.5,2.0.0) as suggested by Peter.
Comment 6 Peter Farrell CLA 2007-05-30 09:34:05 EDT
I just found another plug-in that has a dependency on org.eclipse.ant whose
tolerance is [1.6.5,1.8). I think that is a little restrictive but you guys are
the experts. The plug-in that has that setting is org.eclipse.jdt.apt.core.

Don't know which one you want to follow. 
Comment 7 Adam Archer CLA 2007-05-30 09:39:27 EDT
Personally I can't foresee a problem with allowing too high a version of ant, particularly in a plug-in that is soon to be deprecated. If anything, it will prevent this issue from popping up again in the future. I would stick with the 2.0.0 limit as recommended.

Chris and Curtis to review.
Comment 8 Curtis d'Entremont CLA 2007-05-30 10:34:05 EDT
The tomcat plug-in will hopefully be removed in 3.4. It's only in 3.3 as a temporary measure to allow teams such as yours time to migrate to the equinox http service implementation (http://www.eclipse.org/equinox/server/).

So as long as the version covers the current version of the ant plug-in in 3.3, we're fine.
Comment 9 Chris Goldthorpe CLA 2007-05-30 13:54:28 EDT
Patch committed to HEAD
Comment 10 Chris Goldthorpe CLA 2007-06-04 13:52:27 EDT
*** Bug 186079 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 Adam Archer CLA 2007-06-11 10:07:29 EDT
Verified in I20070608-1718.