[java] Use different version of pmd-core and pmd-java?

[fflatorre]

I'm trying to upgrade pmd-core to leverage the caching benefits (version 6.2.0) but still keep using the existing rule set (version 5.5.2), however every attempt fails with exception like :

java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: net.sourceforge.pmd.lang.java.rule.basic.AvoidUsingOctalValuesRule.definePropertyDescriptor(Lnet/sourceforge/pmd/PropertyDescriptor;)V

        at net.sourceforge.pmd.lang.java.rule.basic.AvoidUsingOctalValuesRule.<init>(AvoidUsingOctalValuesRule.java:23)
        at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native Method)
        at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.java:62)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:45)
        at java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance(Constructor.java:423)
        at java.lang.Class.newInstance(Class.java:442)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.rules.RuleBuilder.build(RuleBuilder.java:179)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.rules.RuleFactory.buildRule(RuleFactory.java:189)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseSingleRuleNode(RuleSetFactory.java:562)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleNode(RuleSetFactory.java:461)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetNode(RuleSetFactory.java:367)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:214)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:209)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetReferenceNode(RuleSetFactory.java:500)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleNode(RuleSetFactory.java:459)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetNode(RuleSetFactory.java:367)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:214)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:209)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSets(RuleSetFactory.java:170)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSets(RuleSetFactory.java:154)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.ant.internal.PMDTaskImpl.doTask(PMDTaskImpl.java:119)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.ant.internal.PMDTaskImpl.execute(PMDTaskImpl.java:277)
        at net.sourceforge.pmd.ant.PMDTask.execute(PMDTask.java:50)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.UnknownElement.execute(UnknownElement.java:292)
        at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor4.invoke(Unknown Source)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.dispatch.DispatchUtils.execute(DispatchUtils.java:106)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.Task.perform(Task.java:346)
        at java.util.Vector.forEach(Vector.java:1249)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.Sequential.execute(Sequential.java:67)
        at net.sf.antcontrib.logic.IfTask.execute(IfTask.java:197)
        at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor24.invoke(Unknown Source)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.dispatch.DispatchUtils.execute(DispatchUtils.java:106)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.TaskAdapter.execute(TaskAdapter.java:155)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.UnknownElement.execute(UnknownElement.java:292)
        at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor4.invoke(Unknown Source)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.dispatch.DispatchUtils.execute(DispatchUtils.java:106)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.Task.perform(Task.java:346)
        at java.util.Vector.forEach(Vector.java:1249)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.Sequential.execute(Sequential.java:67)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.UnknownElement.execute(UnknownElement.java:292)
        at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor4.invoke(Unknown Source)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.dispatch.DispatchUtils.execute(DispatchUtils.java:106)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.Task.perform(Task.java:346)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.MacroInstance.execute(MacroInstance.java:394)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.UnknownElement.execute(UnknownElement.java:292)
        at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor4.invoke(Unknown Source)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.dispatch.DispatchUtils.execute(DispatchUtils.java:106)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.Task.perform(Task.java:346)
        at org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.Parallel$TaskRunnable.run(Parallel.java:455)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)

Not sure if anything to do with this commit
Is it possible to run pmd-core against an older version of pmd-java ?
Thanks,
Francesco

Affects PMD Version:
5.5.2,6.2.0
Rule:
NA
Description:
NA
Code Sample demonstrating the issue:

NA

Running PMD through: [Ant]

[adangel]

Hi @fflatorre ,
this is not supported - and this specific combination will never be: Mixing two different major versions (PMD 5.x.y and PMD 6.x.y) won't work (as you have seen). It might work to mix two minor versions within a major version, e.g. PMD 6.2.0 and PMD 6.0.0, but even this is not guaranteed. We only guarantee, that pmd-core/pmd-java with the same version are working together (we don't test anything else).

The way forward here is, to simply update both dependencies to PMD 6.2.0. The ruleset should be compatible (as long as you don't use the removed rule UseSingleton). You might just see a lot of deprecation warnings, since we moved the rules into categories with PMD 6. But these are just warnings, the rules should still be working.

Thanks,
Andreas

[fflatorre]

Hi @adangel ,

Thanks for the clarification.
Using version 6.2.0, along side the mentioned warning messages we started to get new violations (a lot more) so I suspect the rules maybe are not compatible.
On top of that, the report is not built correctly so there is a bit of work to do.

Cheers,
Francesco

[jsotuyod]

@fflatorre rules are compatible, but we did many improvements since 5.5, so lots of false negatives have been fixed. If you were referencing whole rulesets you may also be getting new rules applied.

If you do find any false positives, please report it in a separate issue.