Re: [eclipselink-dev] [External] : No org.eclipse.persistence.asm for Ec

[William Dazey <dazeydev.3@xxxxxxxxx>]

> PS: no offense (if it sounded like that), it took me a while before I found that Find Button feature

Oh, no offense taken. Sarcasm and snide remarks usually don't
translate well in text based communications so I default to assume the
intention is genuine when dealing with professional communications
(unless otherwise indicated).

I am aware of that searching option, I just didn't think to check if
"EclipseLink ASM code" was checked into a specific release BRANCH.
Keep in mind that much of the EclipseLink build process is completely
foreign to me and I don't know all the little places you have things
stashed away or the processes that you know how they work.

Thanks,
Will Dazey

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:43 PM Lukas Jungmann
<lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> PS: no offense (if it sounded like that), it took me a while before I
> found that Find Button feature. My life became easier when I got used to
> it ;-)
>
> --lukas
>
> On 7/26/21 11:31 PM, Lukas Jungmann wrote:
> > On 7/26/21 11:06 PM, William Dazey wrote:
> >> To be clear, I am not referring to the ASM source. From my
> >> understanding, the build process pulls in the base ASM source from the
> >> ASM project (or maybe maven) so that we can repackage it with
> >> `org.eclipse.persistence.asm.*`. For instance,
> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://asm.ow2.io/javadoc/org/objectweb/asm/ClassWriter.html__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!bmjB3firWfdbMtPoVoyHE5hnAlHfhq712cvomfMP4Nvnn6TJFehFb5skdUySJerACFY$
> >> is
> >> pulled in, repackaged into
> >> `org.eclipse.persistence.internal.libraries.asm.ClassWriter`.
> >>
> >> I'm talking about the source that builds
> >> `org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0`. How does
> >> `org.eclipse.persistence.internal.libraries.asm.EclipseLinkASMClassWriter`
> >>
> >> get created? Where does that code exist?
> >
> > I open
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/eclipselink__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!euqRRM4dKFPB6EW_pq2UzG1G5a-KYqD_Eh6Zw8S5Zvtz_wz2QtchPlRRBh4EY1h9Esw$
> > I click on the "Go to file" button
> > I type in "EclipseLinkASMClassWriter"
> >
> > => I see the link to the source
> >
> > thanks,
> > --lukas
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Will Dazey
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 3:30 PM William Dazey <dazeydev.3@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> That would be possible if the sources were in 2.7 branch. But that
> >>>> is NOT the case. It is also no longer part of 2.7 (or 3.x if you
> >>>> want) release build
> >>>
> >>> Ok, so where does the source exist now? We built
> >>> org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0 and uploaded
> >>> to maven central, yes? How did that bundle get built? From which
> >>> release branch?
> >>>
> >>> I am assuming what you mean is that maybe there is no EclipseLink ASM
> >>> source code and that what we do is pull in ASM source, make changes at
> >>> build time, repackage it as an EclipseLink ASM bundle
> >>> (org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm) and then publish
> >>> it? So where does THAT build process get run? Is that code checked
> >>> into any release branches?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Will Dazey
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 3:00 PM Lukas Jungmann
> >>> <lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 26. 7. 2021 v 20:10, William Dazey <dazeydev.3@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello!
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you think it would be better to keep publishing the same binary
> >>>> under 2, 3, 4+ different version numbers - one for 2.6 stream, one
> >>>> for 2.7, another for 3.0 and in foreseeable also one for 3.1,
> >>>> generally, going forward, one for each maintained version stream -
> >>>> in maven central instead of having just one binary there and letting
> >>>> all streams to depend on that one?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Correct me if I'm wrong please. Each release branch (2.6, 2.7, 3.0,
> >>>> master) has their own ASM code checked into it, yes?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not see it at
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/eclipselink/tree/2.7/plugins__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!bmjB3firWfdbMtPoVoyHE5hnAlHfhq712cvomfMP4Nvnn6TJFehFb5skdUySfYfhdxw$
> >>>> where it used to be. Do you see it on some other place? 2.6 may
> >>>> still have it as I’m not sure that branch was updated already
> >>>>
> >>>> However, we
> >>>> assume they are all at the same exact code then only build one, assign
> >>>> it the official ASM version in maven central (for instance
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0`), and let
> >>>> all EclipseLink releases share in that build?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes. We only don’t assume, we KNOW it is all the same code. Just
> >>>> take a look at package versions being exported from those different
> >>>> versions of the same jar - one can easily find matching pairs in 2.6
> >>>> and 2.7 versions, so from OSGi point of view, there is ie almost no
> >>>> difference between what maven sees as 2.7.7 and 2.6.8. The only
> >>>> difference is the qualifier part of the Bundle-Version header, so
> >>>> really no semantic difference
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So, for instance, we can build the EclipseLink ASM code in the 2.7
> >>>> release branch, upload to maven central calling it
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0`, AND use
> >>>> it for the 3.0.2 release as well! Even though the 3.0 release branch
> >>>> has its own EclipseLink ASM code checked into that git branch...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> That would be possible if the sources were in 2.7 branch. But that
> >>>> is NOT the case. It is also no longer part of 2.7 (or 3.x if you
> >>>> want) release build, so the only case when this could happen is
> >>>> explicit intention. In theory, this can happen in 3.x streams but
> >>>> again - it would have to be done with explicit intent.
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW: what’s in maven central already is written in a stone and
> >>>> cannot be changed. There is no way to overwrite or remove artifacts
> >>>> from there. Only rare exceptions from this rule are made by sonatype
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think it is great to have ONE EclipseLink ASM release
> >>>> (`org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.0.0` or
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0`) since
> >>>> there should not be really any differences between EclipseLink
> >>>> releases (2.6, 2.7, 3.0, master) that warrant needing separate builds.
> >>>> HOWEVER, I also think it then makes no sense for that ASM code to be
> >>>> checked into those individual branches. Instead, EclipseLink ASM
> >>>> should be pull out into its own repository (for instance,
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/eclipselink-asm__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6Z08vWme0$
> >>>> or something)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I see no reason why this cannot be done. No explicit comment was
> >>>> made when I was asking about this within related issue, so the
> >>>> easiest and fastest way was taken.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Well, this is the way it is since EclipseLink 2.5.1 at least,
> >>>> probably since the time this feature was introduced around
> >>>> EclipseLink 2.4.2. There may be even bug filed for this somewhere.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Granted it's been called
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen.processor`
> >>>>
> >>>> in maven for a very long time. My only point is that it has also been
> >>>> called `org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen_*.jar` and
> >>>> `Bundle-SymbolicName: org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen` for just
> >>>> as long. Just inconsistent.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think this is fixed in master/3.x. I don’t think there is good
> >>>> enough justification for this change which outweighs potential risk
> >>>> in 2.7.x and necessary updates all over docs, wikis and other places
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> —lukas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Will Dazey
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:12 AM Lukas Jungmann
> >>>> <lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 7/26/21 5:07 PM, William Dazey wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> No, it is intentional. eclipselink 2.7.9 uses
> >>>>
> >>>> org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> How is that indicated in
> >>>>
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=*rt*eclipselink*releases*2.7.9*eclipselink-plugins-2.7.9.v20210604-2c549e2208.zip__;Ly8vLy8!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6Z2piyxUM$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=*rt*eclipselink*releases*2.7.9*eclipselink-plugins-2.7.9.v20210604-2c549e2208.zip__;Ly8vLy8!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QATjKrh34$>?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Almost nothing has changed in the MANIFEST.MF and now the jar is just
> >>>>
> >>>> called `org.eclipse.persistence.asm.jar`. Compared to
> >>>>
> >>>> `https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=*rt*eclipselink*releases*2.7.8*eclipselink-plugins-2.7.8.v20201217-ecdf3c32c4.zip__;Ly8vLy8!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6Zrhw858o$
> >>>> `
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=*rt*eclipselink*releases*2.7.8*eclipselink-plugins-2.7.8.v20201217-ecdf3c32c4.zip*60__;Ly8vLy8l!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QApjq-veY$>,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't see anything that changed to indicate this version convention
> >>>>
> >>>> change on maven central. Maybe the JAR bundle name should be
> >>>>
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence.asm_9.1.0.v20210604-2c549e2208.jar`?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you think it would be better to keep publishing the same binary
> >>>>
> >>>> under 2, 3, 4+ different version numbers - one for 2.6 stream, one for
> >>>>
> >>>> 2.7, another for 3.0 and in foreseeable also one for 3.1, generally,
> >>>>
> >>>> going forward, one for each maintained version stream - in maven
> >>>> central
> >>>>
> >>>> instead of having just one binary there and letting all streams to
> >>>>
> >>>> depend on that one? All streams see o.e.p.asm just as any other
> >>>>
> >>>> 3rd-party library, like gmbal or most api jars (jakarta.*jar) - so if
> >>>>
> >>>> one looks at it from that perspective, the naming is consistent with
> >>>>
> >>>> others. It's just the name what reflects the reality wrt origin of the
> >>>>
> >>>> file and its relationship to EclipseLink project.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The other difference you see (the qualifier dis-appearance) is
> >>>> caused by
> >>>>
> >>>> the switch from Tycho to Maven. Tycho uses, in most cases,
> >>>>
> >>>> manifest-first approach to build artifacts and, in general, works with
> >>>>
> >>>> qualifiers instead of "SNAPSHOT"s to bring in ability to
> >>>> differentiate 2
> >>>>
> >>>> different nightly builds. Maven has no such notion and generally uses
> >>>>
> >>>> just snapshots for them providing no "default" way to easily
> >>>>
> >>>> differentiate 2 different SNAPSHOT builds.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And no update for ANTRL as well? That hasn't changed from version 3.5.2
> >>>>
> >>>> for years and we still use '2.7.8', '2.7.9', ect. Granted
> >>>> EclipseLink >=
> >>>>
> >>>> 3.0 doesn't use ANTRL anymore, but 2.7 does. Feels inconsistent for
> >>>> 2.7.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I agree that it feels inconsistent. Nobody touched that part of the
> >>>>
> >>>> build for about a decade, it's still being rebuilt and republished on
> >>>>
> >>>> each release. The only change there I recall was an upgrade of ANTLR
> >>>>
> >>>> from sth like 3.2 to 3.5.2 and/or some clean up there in EclipseLink
> >>>>
> >>>> 2.5.2 timeframe.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> (there used to be class files directly checked in in the repo for both
> >>>>
> >>>> ASM as well as ANTLR before 2.5.2)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Also, comparing Maven Central with
> >>>>
> >>>> `https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=*rt*eclipselink*releases__;Ly8v!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6ZbYUk0ko$
> >>>> `
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=*rt*eclipselink*releases*60__;Ly8vJQ!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QAM2O4y5Q$>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I notice another difference. In the `eclipse.org/downloads`
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://eclipse.org/downloads*60__;JQ!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QANblE-cQ$>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> artifacts,
> >>>>
> >>>> the `org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen` bundle is called
> >>>>
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen_2.7.9.v20210604-2c549e2208.jar`
> >>>>
> >>>> and the Manifest also indicates the bundle name to be
> >>>>
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen`:
> >>>>
> >>>> ```
> >>>>
> >>>>      Bundle-Name: EclipseLink JPA ModelGen
> >>>>
> >>>> Bundle-SymbolicName: org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen
> >>>>
> >>>> Bundle-Vendor: Eclipse.org - EclipseLink Project
> >>>>
> >>>> Bundle-Version: 2.7.9.v20210604-2c549e2208
> >>>>
> >>>> ```
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> However, on maven central, the we give the artifact an ID of
> >>>>
> >>>> `org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen.processor`
> >>>>
> >>>> (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.eclipse.persistence/org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen.processor__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6ZxJqwVYE$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.eclipse.persistence/org.eclipse.persistence.jpa.modelgen.processor__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QABj2AAEo$>)?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Can we get this inconsistency fixed because it's a bit confusing what
> >>>>
> >>>> the true name of this bundle is supposed to be
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Well, this is the way it is since EclipseLink 2.5.1 at least, probably
> >>>>
> >>>> since the time this feature was introduced around EclipseLink 2.4.2.
> >>>>
> >>>> There may be even bug filed for this somewhere.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> --lukas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Will Dazey
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 12:54 PM Lukas Jungmann
> >>>>
> >>>> <lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>     On 7/21/21 6:37 PM, Jody Grassel wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I was checking maven central, and noticed there were no resources
> >>>>
> >>>>     for
> >>>>
> >>>> the maven coordinate
> >>>>
> >>>> "org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:2.7.9" -- is
> >>>>
> >>>>     this
> >>>>
> >>>> an omission?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>     No, it is intention. eclipselink 2.7.9 uses
> >>>>
> >>>>     org.eclipse.persistence:org.eclipse.persistence.asm:9.1.0 - same
> >>>>
> >>>>     version
> >>>>
> >>>>     as master and/or 3.0.2.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>     thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>     --lukas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!c282CiRmzlMujtr4Dr0XaiYSiIHmAxdDiXr9s4MI2haeGi5LjKioaMf51c4a3t1ApQQ$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!c282CiRmzlMujtr4Dr0XaiYSiIHmAxdDiXr9s4MI2haeGi5LjKioaMf51c4a3t1ApQQ$>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>     _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>>     eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>>     eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>>     To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6ZCGh5cs4$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QAcJRNF-w$>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!eSOjYOMvm0BH_b4656J9Q_vkopUw3ce2xvSgNsIlAMnGN0-LgaTme8wlF1QAcJRNF-w$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6ZCGh5cs4$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >>>> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YiPSFL1bj2w4dTEV8gt3OLrTCUWLFpg0rARQArj0Kvmt9MYYAf1HGvB8sI6ZCGh5cs4$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >>>> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!bmjB3firWfdbMtPoVoyHE5hnAlHfhq712cvomfMP4Nvnn6TJFehFb5skdUyS_q25kP0$
> >>>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> >> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!bmjB3firWfdbMtPoVoyHE5hnAlHfhq712cvomfMP4Nvnn6TJFehFb5skdUyS_q25kP0$
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > eclipselink-dev mailing list
> > eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!euqRRM4dKFPB6EW_pq2UzG1G5a-KYqD_Eh6Zw8S5Zvtz_wz2QtchPlRRBh4Eivnq91o$
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev