You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@deltaspike.apache.org by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com> on 2012/02/22 07:27:05 UTC
reverted commit
hi @ all,
i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
didn't add
"Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
ALv2"
to the commit message of the initial import.
furthermore there were
- no license headers
- 81 checkstyle issues
i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
again.
@shane:
please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
message.
@all:
please always run
mvn clean install
before a push.
regards,
gerhard
[1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Shane Bryzak <sb...@redhat.com>.
All taken care of now.
On 22/02/12 16:27, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> hi @ all,
>
> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
> didn't add
> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
> ALv2"
> to the commit message of the initial import.
>
> furthermore there were
> - no license headers
> - 81 checkstyle issues
> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
> again.
>
> @shane:
> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
> message.
>
> @all:
> please always run
> mvn clean install
> before a push.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
>
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
Yes, I believe that is where we ended. Richard has the list for Solder, I'm not sure if the grant has been signed though.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:50, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think that's the idea, yes. However, with this particular commit I'm not sure if Shane rewrote the stuff he committed or just modified it were needed for the API changes from Solder to DS. This will probably be a common thing as more modules are migrated from Seam into DS.
>
> I thought our IP talks involved the idea that either the SGA would be
> extended as needed, or new ones filed. If either of these can be made
> to apply, then AFAIK we're still okay.
>
> Matt
>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:27, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This is simply a stop gap until all the issues with the software grant are worked out. Richard has the files from Solder for the grant. Since I don't think it's been finalized should we now also include Security? I wonder if that will be tricky as Security is so tightly coupled with PicketLink.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm, I thought you were redoing the security API from the ground up.
>>> And couldn't we do the security stuff such that PicketLink is only an
>>> option?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:09, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
>>>>> of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
>>>>> happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
>>>>> *expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
>>>>> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> hi @ all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
>>>>>> didn't add
>>>>>> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
>>>>>> ALv2"
>>>>>> to the commit message of the initial import.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> furthermore there were
>>>>>> - no license headers
>>>>>> - 81 checkstyle issues
>>>>>> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @shane:
>>>>>> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
>>>>>> message.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @all:
>>>>>> please always run
>>>>>> mvn clean install
>>>>>> before a push.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that's the idea, yes. However, with this particular commit I'm not sure if Shane rewrote the stuff he committed or just modified it were needed for the API changes from Solder to DS. This will probably be a common thing as more modules are migrated from Seam into DS.
I thought our IP talks involved the idea that either the SGA would be
extended as needed, or new ones filed. If either of these can be made
to apply, then AFAIK we're still okay.
Matt
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:27, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is simply a stop gap until all the issues with the software grant are worked out. Richard has the files from Solder for the grant. Since I don't think it's been finalized should we now also include Security? I wonder if that will be tricky as Security is so tightly coupled with PicketLink.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, I thought you were redoing the security API from the ground up.
>> And couldn't we do the security stuff such that PicketLink is only an
>> option?
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:09, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
>>>> of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
>>>> happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
>>>> *expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
>>>> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> hi @ all,
>>>>>
>>>>> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
>>>>> didn't add
>>>>> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
>>>>> ALv2"
>>>>> to the commit message of the initial import.
>>>>>
>>>>> furthermore there were
>>>>> - no license headers
>>>>> - 81 checkstyle issues
>>>>> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
>>>>> again.
>>>>>
>>>>> @shane:
>>>>> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
>>>>> message.
>>>>>
>>>>> @all:
>>>>> please always run
>>>>> mvn clean install
>>>>> before a push.
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
I think that's the idea, yes. However, with this particular commit I'm not sure if Shane rewrote the stuff he committed or just modified it were needed for the API changes from Solder to DS. This will probably be a common thing as more modules are migrated from Seam into DS.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:27, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is simply a stop gap until all the issues with the software grant are worked out. Richard has the files from Solder for the grant. Since I don't think it's been finalized should we now also include Security? I wonder if that will be tricky as Security is so tightly coupled with PicketLink.
>>
>
> Hmm, I thought you were redoing the security API from the ground up.
> And couldn't we do the security stuff such that PicketLink is only an
> option?
>
> Matt
>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:09, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
>>> of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
>>> happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
>>> *expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
>>> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> hi @ all,
>>>>
>>>> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
>>>> didn't add
>>>> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
>>>> ALv2"
>>>> to the commit message of the initial import.
>>>>
>>>> furthermore there were
>>>> - no license headers
>>>> - 81 checkstyle issues
>>>> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> @shane:
>>>> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
>>>> message.
>>>>
>>>> @all:
>>>> please always run
>>>> mvn clean install
>>>> before a push.
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> gerhard
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is simply a stop gap until all the issues with the software grant are worked out. Richard has the files from Solder for the grant. Since I don't think it's been finalized should we now also include Security? I wonder if that will be tricky as Security is so tightly coupled with PicketLink.
>
Hmm, I thought you were redoing the security API from the ground up.
And couldn't we do the security stuff such that PicketLink is only an
option?
Matt
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:09, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
>> of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
>> happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
>> *expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
>> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> hi @ all,
>>>
>>> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
>>> didn't add
>>> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
>>> ALv2"
>>> to the commit message of the initial import.
>>>
>>> furthermore there were
>>> - no license headers
>>> - 81 checkstyle issues
>>> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
>>> again.
>>>
>>> @shane:
>>> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
>>> message.
>>>
>>> @all:
>>> please always run
>>> mvn clean install
>>> before a push.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> gerhard
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Shane Bryzak <sb...@redhat.com>.
There'll be no PicketLink integration in DeltaSpike Security.
On 23/02/12 02:25, Jason Porter wrote:
> This is simply a stop gap until all the issues with the software grant are worked out. Richard has the files from Solder for the grant. Since I don't think it's been finalized should we now also include Security? I wonder if that will be tricky as Security is so tightly coupled with PicketLink.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:09, Matt Benson<gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
>> of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
>> happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
>> *expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
>> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> hi @ all,
>>>
>>> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
>>> didn't add
>>> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
>>> ALv2"
>>> to the commit message of the initial import.
>>>
>>> furthermore there were
>>> - no license headers
>>> - 81 checkstyle issues
>>> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
>>> again.
>>>
>>> @shane:
>>> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
>>> message.
>>>
>>> @all:
>>> please always run
>>> mvn clean install
>>> before a push.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> gerhard
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
This is simply a stop gap until all the issues with the software grant are worked out. Richard has the files from Solder for the grant. Since I don't think it's been finalized should we now also include Security? I wonder if that will be tricky as Security is so tightly coupled with PicketLink.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:09, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
> of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
> happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
> *expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
>
> Matt
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> hi @ all,
>>
>> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
>> didn't add
>> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
>> ALv2"
>> to the commit message of the initial import.
>>
>> furthermore there were
>> - no license headers
>> - 81 checkstyle issues
>> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
>> again.
>>
>> @shane:
>> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
>> message.
>>
>> @all:
>> please always run
>> mvn clean install
>> before a push.
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed
Re: reverted commit
Posted by Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com>.
Wait, I don't think is where we landed! :) Per Sam "under the terms
of the ALv2" is *not* the kind of license/grant we want, and he is
happy to let deltaspike go on committing things for which everyone
*expects* the appropriate SG will be eventually filed.
Matt
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Gerhard Petracek
<ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi @ all,
>
> i had to revert 1177d4a7fd3e669eb84ce3987368d5ceaebfeb6a because shane
> didn't add
> "Submitted on behalf of a third-part: Red Hat, Inc. under the terms of the
> ALv2"
> to the commit message of the initial import.
>
> furthermore there were
> - no license headers
> - 81 checkstyle issues
> i fixed those issues and pushed them to [1] - so you don't have to do it
> again.
>
> @shane:
> please import the files again and don't forget the hint in the commit
> message.
>
> @all:
> please always run
> mvn clean install
> before a push.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] https://github.com/os890/DS_Discuss/tree/DS69fixed