Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rework build logic #104

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 7, 2025
Merged

Rework build logic #104

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 7, 2025

Conversation

melix
Copy link
Contributor

@melix melix commented Jan 7, 2025

This commit reworks how the model class is "shared" between the annotation processor and the jazzer plugin. Instead of using a symlink, the code is now generated by a common build plugin. In practice, the 2 modules use the same record, but in a different package. It's also cleaner in the sense that there's no dependency between the plugin and the annotation processor, which would have led to too many classes on classpath.

Fixes #101

@melix melix requested a review from yawkat January 7, 2025 14:13
This commit reworks how the model class is "shared" between the annotation
processor and the jazzer plugin. Instead of using a symlink, the code is
now generated by a common build plugin. In practice, the 2 modules use the
same record, but in a different package. It's also cleaner in the sense
that there's no dependency between the plugin and the annotation processor,
which would have led to too many classes on classpath.

Fixes #101
useStandardizedProjectNames = true

importMicronautCatalog()

requiresDevelopmentVersion("micronaut-core", "4.8.x")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One thought: Is this requiresDevelopmentVersion thing going to mess with the explicit micronaut version in the jazzer-plugin, or with the central publishing process?

requiresDevelopmentVersion is only really needed for the fuzzing-tests module, but there it really is needed, so it needs to stay in the repo

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it shouldn't mess, no

@yawkat
Copy link
Member

yawkat commented Jan 7, 2025

Also FYI, I'm going to move DefinedFuzzTarget from the processor to fuzzing-api, because I want to introduce an API to run a fuzz test from main with a simple method call. It should work with the approach in this PR, but just so you know.

@yawkat yawkat merged commit 940f0be into master Jan 7, 2025
3 of 6 checks passed
@yawkat yawkat deleted the cc/issue-101 branch January 7, 2025 14:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Clean up dependency mess
2 participants