You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@aries.apache.org by Holly Cummins <ho...@googlemail.com> on 2012/04/08 18:26:14 UTC
[1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox, and
versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
Hi all,
I've now made a dent in moving all the bundle versions to 1.0.0, in the
1.0-prototype branch.
I've left the following at their current versions, on the basis that the
specs they're based on are still in early release:
subsystems
spi-fly
sandbox
versioning
I've moved the following to 1.0 (in the 1.0-prototype branch):
application
blueprint
eba-maven-plugin
jmx
jndi
jpa
parent
proxy
quiesce
samples
testsupport
transaction
tutorials
util
web
ejb
Is ejb stable enough to move to 1.0? Are there any other modules which
shouldn't be moved to 1.0?
Holly
Re: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox, and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
Posted by Holly Cummins <ho...@googlemail.com>.
Thanks, Tim. It sounds like the right thing to do might be to move ejb
to 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT but wait for the OpenEJB release to release it. My
plan for the 1.0.0 release is to release incrementally, starting with
the roots of the dependency tree (like util) and ending with the leaves.
Holly
On 10 Apr 2012, at 11:35, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> The EJB code is pretty stable, but it is built against the 4.0.0-
> beta-1 release of OpenEJB. This may be seen as a problem when it
> comes to doing the actual release...
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
> Tim Ward
> -------------------
> Apache Aries PMC member & Enterprise OSGi advocate
> Enterprise OSGi in Action (http://www.manning.com/cummins)
> -------------------
>
>
>> Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 17:26:14 +0100
>> Subject: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly,
>> sandbox, and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
>> From: holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com
>> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've now made a dent in moving all the bundle versions to 1.0.0, in
>> the
>> 1.0-prototype branch.
>> I've left the following at their current versions, on the basis
>> that the
>> specs they're based on are still in early release:
>>
>> subsystems
>> spi-fly
>> sandbox
>> versioning
>>
>> I've moved the following to 1.0 (in the 1.0-prototype branch):
>>
>> application
>> blueprint
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> jmx
>> jndi
>> jpa
>> parent
>> proxy
>> quiesce
>> samples
>> testsupport
>> transaction
>> tutorials
>> util
>> web
>> ejb
>>
>> Is ejb stable enough to move to 1.0? Are there any other modules
>> which
>> shouldn't be moved to 1.0?
>>
>> Holly
>
Re: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox, and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
Posted by Holly Cummins <ho...@googlemail.com>.
I think that makes a lot of sense, David. As I said in my mail to Tim,
my plan is to release by bundle (or possibly by dependency-layer), so
we can do the JMX part of the 1.0.0 release later rather than sooner
to allow the jmx-next branch lots of time to get merged in.
On 10 Apr 2012, at 11:45, David Bosschaert
<da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've updated the JMX implementation in sandbox/jmx-next. At this point
> it implements the OSGi Enterprise R5 spec and passes all the current
> TCK tests. I guess it would make sense to copy it back to the main jmx
> location and make it part of 1.0?
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> On 10 April 2012 16:35, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> The EJB code is pretty stable, but it is built against the 4.0.0-
>> beta-1 release of OpenEJB. This may be seen as a problem when it
>> comes to doing the actual release...
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> Tim Ward
>> -------------------
>> Apache Aries PMC member & Enterprise OSGi advocate
>> Enterprise OSGi in Action (http://www.manning.com/cummins)
>> -------------------
>>
>>
>>> Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 17:26:14 +0100
>>> Subject: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly,
>>> sandbox, and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
>>> From: holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com
>>> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've now made a dent in moving all the bundle versions to 1.0.0,
>>> in the
>>> 1.0-prototype branch.
>>> I've left the following at their current versions, on the basis
>>> that the
>>> specs they're based on are still in early release:
>>>
>>> subsystems
>>> spi-fly
>>> sandbox
>>> versioning
>>>
>>> I've moved the following to 1.0 (in the 1.0-prototype branch):
>>>
>>> application
>>> blueprint
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> jmx
>>> jndi
>>> jpa
>>> parent
>>> proxy
>>> quiesce
>>> samples
>>> testsupport
>>> transaction
>>> tutorials
>>> util
>>> web
>>> ejb
>>>
>>> Is ejb stable enough to move to 1.0? Are there any other modules
>>> which
>>> shouldn't be moved to 1.0?
>>>
>>> Holly
>>
Re: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox,
and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
Posted by David Bosschaert <da...@gmail.com>.
I've updated the JMX implementation in sandbox/jmx-next. At this point
it implements the OSGi Enterprise R5 spec and passes all the current
TCK tests. I guess it would make sense to copy it back to the main jmx
location and make it part of 1.0?
Cheers,
David
On 10 April 2012 16:35, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> The EJB code is pretty stable, but it is built against the 4.0.0-beta-1 release of OpenEJB. This may be seen as a problem when it comes to doing the actual release...
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
> Tim Ward
> -------------------
> Apache Aries PMC member & Enterprise OSGi advocate
> Enterprise OSGi in Action (http://www.manning.com/cummins)
> -------------------
>
>
>> Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 17:26:14 +0100
>> Subject: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox, and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
>> From: holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com
>> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've now made a dent in moving all the bundle versions to 1.0.0, in the
>> 1.0-prototype branch.
>> I've left the following at their current versions, on the basis that the
>> specs they're based on are still in early release:
>>
>> subsystems
>> spi-fly
>> sandbox
>> versioning
>>
>> I've moved the following to 1.0 (in the 1.0-prototype branch):
>>
>> application
>> blueprint
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> jmx
>> jndi
>> jpa
>> parent
>> proxy
>> quiesce
>> samples
>> testsupport
>> transaction
>> tutorials
>> util
>> web
>> ejb
>>
>> Is ejb stable enough to move to 1.0? Are there any other modules which
>> shouldn't be moved to 1.0?
>>
>> Holly
>
RE: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox,
and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
Posted by Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org>.
The EJB code is pretty stable, but it is built against the 4.0.0-beta-1 release of OpenEJB. This may be seen as a problem when it comes to doing the actual release...
Regards,
Tim
Tim Ward
-------------------
Apache Aries PMC member & Enterprise OSGi advocate
Enterprise OSGi in Action (http://www.manning.com/cummins)
-------------------
> Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 17:26:14 +0100
> Subject: [1.0-release] Am I right to leave subsystems, spi-fly, sandbox, and versioning below 1.0? What about ejb?
> From: holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com
> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've now made a dent in moving all the bundle versions to 1.0.0, in the
> 1.0-prototype branch.
> I've left the following at their current versions, on the basis that the
> specs they're based on are still in early release:
>
> subsystems
> spi-fly
> sandbox
> versioning
>
> I've moved the following to 1.0 (in the 1.0-prototype branch):
>
> application
> blueprint
> eba-maven-plugin
> jmx
> jndi
> jpa
> parent
> proxy
> quiesce
> samples
> testsupport
> transaction
> tutorials
> util
> web
> ejb
>
> Is ejb stable enough to move to 1.0? Are there any other modules which
> shouldn't be moved to 1.0?
>
> Holly