You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2013/04/16 16:51:31 UTC
OWB 1.2?
Hi guys
here is a patch to update openejb codebase to OWB 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT
https://gist.github.com/rmannibucau/5396530
i didnt pass all tests but mainly cdi-embedded (cdi tck for openejb
embedded)
we'll have a bunch of tests issues + potential regressions due to a bunch
of bug of the current codebase (@Typed was ignored in some case for
instance)
since it will break the build and i can't make it passing locally i'll not
apply it now, if anyone wants to help it will be welcomed
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Just to let you know with owb + tomee trunk openejb-core + cdi-embedded are
green :)
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/4/19 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> Today hemera was off (our ci) so hard to go ahead :(
> Le 19 avr. 2013 20:24, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>
> Will try to get my head around it. Not sure I can make it this week as I'm
>> preparing for JAX next week.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> > To: dev@tomee.apache.org
>> > Cc: dev@openejb.apache.org
>> > Sent: Friday, 19 April 2013, 17:27
>> > Subject: Re: OWB 1.2?
>> >
>> > commited the patch, created a branch
>> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-owb-1.1.x/
>> >
>> > note: versions are atm the same
>> >
>> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> > *Blog:
>> > **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2013/4/18 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> >> well, the point is we'll need to update to OWB and since the changes
>> > are
>> >> important (internals really changed) we can't wait a late update if we
>> >> don't want TomEE to be forgotten for other servers because too late on
>> > the
>> >> market or because it has no more activity at all.
>> >>
>> >> I did the update to see regressions introduced by OWB rewritting (a
>> bunch
>> >> since OWB doesn't care about EJB and some CDI tests not activated in
>> > the
>> >> build)
>> >>
>> >> In the important changes i like to import:
>> >> * asm proxying instead of javassist (avoid mem leak + faster)
>> >> * better decorator/interceptor impl (before we had cases almost
>> impossible
>> >> to handle leading to infinite loops)
>> >> * better architecture to prepare CDI 1.1 (TomEE 2?)
>> >> * i removed our custom beansDeployer to use the OWB one (avoiding a
>> fork
>> >> part)
>> >>
>> >> @Andy: my answer was not against you but it was rather a warning
>> saying if
>> >> we want tomee stays alive we need to find a way to support new
>> important
>> >> changes and to stay active
>> >>
>> >> last time cdi was introduced David broke the build for months and
>> nobody
>> >> said anything because it was David but having a clear solution for
>> such
>> >> changes is probably better
>> >>
>> >> CDI being more and more important (in term of popularity and in our
>> code)
>> >> i think it is a good candidate to find a solution to this issue (+ a
>> big
>> >> part of the work is done ;)
>> >>
>> >> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> >> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> >> *Blog:
>> > **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> >> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> >> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2013/4/18 AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>
>> >>
>> >>> I would only to ensure that the current trunk we have (which seems to
>> > be
>> >>> really stable right now) is available as a stable branch for
>> potential
>> > bug
>> >>> fixing.
>> >>>
>> >>> What does OWB 1.2 bring to the party (your opinion, not that of OWB)?
>> >>>
>> >>> I am almost fanatical about updating libraries, so don't think I am
>> >>> against
>> >>> this!
>> >>>
>> >>> Andy
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> View this message in context:
>> >>> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662329.html
>> >>> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Today hemera was off (our ci) so hard to go ahead :(
Le 19 avr. 2013 20:24, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> Will try to get my head around it. Not sure I can make it this week as I'm
> preparing for JAX next week.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@tomee.apache.org
> > Cc: dev@openejb.apache.org
> > Sent: Friday, 19 April 2013, 17:27
> > Subject: Re: OWB 1.2?
> >
> > commited the patch, created a branch
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-owb-1.1.x/
> >
> > note: versions are atm the same
> >
> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > *Blog:
> > **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/4/18 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> well, the point is we'll need to update to OWB and since the changes
> > are
> >> important (internals really changed) we can't wait a late update if we
> >> don't want TomEE to be forgotten for other servers because too late on
> > the
> >> market or because it has no more activity at all.
> >>
> >> I did the update to see regressions introduced by OWB rewritting (a
> bunch
> >> since OWB doesn't care about EJB and some CDI tests not activated in
> > the
> >> build)
> >>
> >> In the important changes i like to import:
> >> * asm proxying instead of javassist (avoid mem leak + faster)
> >> * better decorator/interceptor impl (before we had cases almost
> impossible
> >> to handle leading to infinite loops)
> >> * better architecture to prepare CDI 1.1 (TomEE 2?)
> >> * i removed our custom beansDeployer to use the OWB one (avoiding a
> fork
> >> part)
> >>
> >> @Andy: my answer was not against you but it was rather a warning
> saying if
> >> we want tomee stays alive we need to find a way to support new
> important
> >> changes and to stay active
> >>
> >> last time cdi was introduced David broke the build for months and
> nobody
> >> said anything because it was David but having a clear solution for such
> >> changes is probably better
> >>
> >> CDI being more and more important (in term of popularity and in our
> code)
> >> i think it is a good candidate to find a solution to this issue (+ a
> big
> >> part of the work is done ;)
> >>
> >> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> >> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> >> *Blog:
> > **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> >> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> >> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/4/18 AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>
> >>
> >>> I would only to ensure that the current trunk we have (which seems to
> > be
> >>> really stable right now) is available as a stable branch for potential
> > bug
> >>> fixing.
> >>>
> >>> What does OWB 1.2 bring to the party (your opinion, not that of OWB)?
> >>>
> >>> I am almost fanatical about updating libraries, so don't think I am
> >>> against
> >>> this!
> >>>
> >>> Andy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> View this message in context:
> >>> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662329.html
> >>> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
Will try to get my head around it. Not sure I can make it this week as I'm preparing for JAX next week.
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@tomee.apache.org
> Cc: dev@openejb.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, 19 April 2013, 17:27
> Subject: Re: OWB 1.2?
>
> commited the patch, created a branch
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-owb-1.1.x/
>
> note: versions are atm the same
>
> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> *Blog:
> **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>
>
>
> 2013/4/18 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>
>> well, the point is we'll need to update to OWB and since the changes
> are
>> important (internals really changed) we can't wait a late update if we
>> don't want TomEE to be forgotten for other servers because too late on
> the
>> market or because it has no more activity at all.
>>
>> I did the update to see regressions introduced by OWB rewritting (a bunch
>> since OWB doesn't care about EJB and some CDI tests not activated in
> the
>> build)
>>
>> In the important changes i like to import:
>> * asm proxying instead of javassist (avoid mem leak + faster)
>> * better decorator/interceptor impl (before we had cases almost impossible
>> to handle leading to infinite loops)
>> * better architecture to prepare CDI 1.1 (TomEE 2?)
>> * i removed our custom beansDeployer to use the OWB one (avoiding a fork
>> part)
>>
>> @Andy: my answer was not against you but it was rather a warning saying if
>> we want tomee stays alive we need to find a way to support new important
>> changes and to stay active
>>
>> last time cdi was introduced David broke the build for months and nobody
>> said anything because it was David but having a clear solution for such
>> changes is probably better
>>
>> CDI being more and more important (in term of popularity and in our code)
>> i think it is a good candidate to find a solution to this issue (+ a big
>> part of the work is done ;)
>>
>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> *Blog:
> **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/4/18 AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>
>>
>>> I would only to ensure that the current trunk we have (which seems to
> be
>>> really stable right now) is available as a stable branch for potential
> bug
>>> fixing.
>>>
>>> What does OWB 1.2 bring to the party (your opinion, not that of OWB)?
>>>
>>> I am almost fanatical about updating libraries, so don't think I am
>>> against
>>> this!
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662329.html
>>> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
commited the patch, created a branch
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-owb-1.1.x/
note: versions are atm the same
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/4/18 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> well, the point is we'll need to update to OWB and since the changes are
> important (internals really changed) we can't wait a late update if we
> don't want TomEE to be forgotten for other servers because too late on the
> market or because it has no more activity at all.
>
> I did the update to see regressions introduced by OWB rewritting (a bunch
> since OWB doesn't care about EJB and some CDI tests not activated in the
> build)
>
> In the important changes i like to import:
> * asm proxying instead of javassist (avoid mem leak + faster)
> * better decorator/interceptor impl (before we had cases almost impossible
> to handle leading to infinite loops)
> * better architecture to prepare CDI 1.1 (TomEE 2?)
> * i removed our custom beansDeployer to use the OWB one (avoiding a fork
> part)
>
> @Andy: my answer was not against you but it was rather a warning saying if
> we want tomee stays alive we need to find a way to support new important
> changes and to stay active
>
> last time cdi was introduced David broke the build for months and nobody
> said anything because it was David but having a clear solution for such
> changes is probably better
>
> CDI being more and more important (in term of popularity and in our code)
> i think it is a good candidate to find a solution to this issue (+ a big
> part of the work is done ;)
>
> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>
>
>
> 2013/4/18 AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>
>
>> I would only to ensure that the current trunk we have (which seems to be
>> really stable right now) is available as a stable branch for potential bug
>> fixing.
>>
>> What does OWB 1.2 bring to the party (your opinion, not that of OWB)?
>>
>> I am almost fanatical about updating libraries, so don't think I am
>> against
>> this!
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662329.html
>> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
well, the point is we'll need to update to OWB and since the changes are
important (internals really changed) we can't wait a late update if we
don't want TomEE to be forgotten for other servers because too late on the
market or because it has no more activity at all.
I did the update to see regressions introduced by OWB rewritting (a bunch
since OWB doesn't care about EJB and some CDI tests not activated in the
build)
In the important changes i like to import:
* asm proxying instead of javassist (avoid mem leak + faster)
* better decorator/interceptor impl (before we had cases almost impossible
to handle leading to infinite loops)
* better architecture to prepare CDI 1.1 (TomEE 2?)
* i removed our custom beansDeployer to use the OWB one (avoiding a fork
part)
@Andy: my answer was not against you but it was rather a warning saying if
we want tomee stays alive we need to find a way to support new important
changes and to stay active
last time cdi was introduced David broke the build for months and nobody
said anything because it was David but having a clear solution for such
changes is probably better
CDI being more and more important (in term of popularity and in our code) i
think it is a good candidate to find a solution to this issue (+ a big part
of the work is done ;)
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/4/18 AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>
> I would only to ensure that the current trunk we have (which seems to be
> really stable right now) is available as a stable branch for potential bug
> fixing.
>
> What does OWB 1.2 bring to the party (your opinion, not that of OWB)?
>
> I am almost fanatical about updating libraries, so don't think I am against
> this!
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662329.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>.
I would only to ensure that the current trunk we have (which seems to be
really stable right now) is available as a stable branch for potential bug
fixing.
What does OWB 1.2 bring to the party (your opinion, not that of OWB)?
I am almost fanatical about updating libraries, so don't think I am against
this!
Andy
--
View this message in context: http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662329.html
Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
well, i'm not happy about it but i can't do it alone and on my machine (too
much changes and too much wrong stuffs in our current trunk) so basically
the question is "is tomee still active enough to evolve?"
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/4/17 AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>
> +1 Only if trunk passing, else create a branch until stable.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662323.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by AndyG <an...@orprovision.com>.
+1 Only if trunk passing, else create a branch until stable.
--
View this message in context: http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OWB-1-2-tp4662300p4662323.html
Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OWB 1.2?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
guys,
any objections if i commit it if no -1 answer on friday?
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/4/16 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> Hi guys
>
> here is a patch to update openejb codebase to OWB 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT
> https://gist.github.com/rmannibucau/5396530
>
> i didnt pass all tests but mainly cdi-embedded (cdi tck for openejb
> embedded)
>
> we'll have a bunch of tests issues + potential regressions due to a bunch
> of bug of the current codebase (@Typed was ignored in some case for
> instance)
>
> since it will break the build and i can't make it passing locally i'll not
> apply it now, if anyone wants to help it will be welcomed
>
>
> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>
>