You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by David Blevins <da...@visi.com> on 2005/07/19 19:03:27 UTC
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
On Jul 19, 2005, at 7:06 AM, sissonj@insession.com wrote:
>
> Can everyone please check that any work they are planning on doing
> for the M4 release is listed when you view the open issues for the
> 1.0-M4 version, so we don't have any last minute surprises.
>
I pulled down the list of outstanding issues for M4:
GERONIMO-518 Deploying Struts app fails on Logging ClassCastException
GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
GERONIMO-746 Move from commons_discovery SNAPSHOT to formal version
GERONIMO-741 Move from ActiveIO 1.0 to ActiveIO 1.1
GERONIMO-740 Move from ActiveMQ 3.1-SNAPSHOT to a formal release
GERONIMO-755 Move from Scout (JAXR) version 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a
formal version
GERONIMO-756 Move ServiceMix from 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a formal or
dated/versioned release for Geronimo M4
GERONIMO-757 Move from jUDDI SNAPSHOT to formal version
GERONIMO-745 Move from Axis 1.3-SNAPSHOT to formal version
GERONIMO-760 Move tmporb SNAPSHOT dependency to a dated version in
M4 Geronimo & OpenEJB branches
GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
GERONIMO-772 Move OpenEJB from jelly velocity tags SNAPSHOT to
version 1.0
GERONIMO-771 Move from custom cglib build version HEAD-06-06-05 to
cglib-nodep-2.1_2.jar
In that list, these are the only two non-dependency related items:
GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
Could I humbly submit that GERONIMO-664 is a new feature that could
simply be documented as not working for M4?
We could probably get the dependencies cleared up today and the CTS
testing started and (knocking on wood) the release out by the end of
the week.
-David
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
GERONIMO-763 too.
Jeff
David Jencks wrote:
> what is the proper use of Jira for defects that occur in multiple
> branches/releases? There are at least 2 issues fixed in head that need
> to be backported
>
> GERONIMO-645
> GERONIMO-768
>
> Also, I suggest that anyone changing a dependency version in M4 should
> do the same in head at the same time. vice versa I'm less concerned about
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> On Jul 19, 2005, at 10:03 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>
>> On Jul 19, 2005, at 7:06 AM, sissonj@insession.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Can everyone please check that any work they are planning on doing
>>> for the M4 release is listed when you view the open issues for the
>>> 1.0-M4 version, so we don't have any last minute surprises.
>>>
>>
>> I pulled down the list of outstanding issues for M4:
>>
>> GERONIMO-518 Deploying Struts app fails on Logging ClassCastException
>> GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
>> GERONIMO-746 Move from commons_discovery SNAPSHOT to formal version
>> GERONIMO-741 Move from ActiveIO 1.0 to ActiveIO 1.1
>> GERONIMO-740 Move from ActiveMQ 3.1-SNAPSHOT to a formal release
>> GERONIMO-755 Move from Scout (JAXR) version 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a
>> formal version
>> GERONIMO-756 Move ServiceMix from 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a formal or
>> dated/versioned release for Geronimo M4
>> GERONIMO-757 Move from jUDDI SNAPSHOT to formal version
>> GERONIMO-745 Move from Axis 1.3-SNAPSHOT to formal version
>> GERONIMO-760 Move tmporb SNAPSHOT dependency to a dated version in
>> M4 Geronimo & OpenEJB branches
>> GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
>> GERONIMO-772 Move OpenEJB from jelly velocity tags SNAPSHOT to
>> version 1.0
>> GERONIMO-771 Move from custom cglib build version HEAD-06-06-05 to
>> cglib-nodep-2.1_2.jar
>>
>> In that list, these are the only two non-dependency related items:
>> GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
>> GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
>>
>> Could I humbly submit that GERONIMO-664 is a new feature that could
>> simply be documented as not working for M4?
>>
>> We could probably get the dependencies cleared up today and the CTS
>> testing started and (knocking on wood) the release out by the end of
>> the week.
>>
>> -David
>>
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
Posted by si...@insession.com.
Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote on 20/07/2005 11:58:52 AM:
> On Jul 19, 2005, at 10:24 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
> > what is the proper use of Jira for defects that occur in multiple
> > branches/releases? There are at least 2 issues fixed in head that
> > need to be backported
>
> If the fix is back ported, I would say you just set the fixed number
> to M4. Once M4 is released it will appear as if it were originally
> fixed in M4 and simply carried into M5+.
In taking that approach, those issues that have been fixed in head should
not be closed until they have been backported, so it is easily visible
that that work needs to be done. So currently it seems some issues need
to be reopened.
The problem I see with that approach is that from the lists in JIRA it
will not be obvious that the work has been completed in HEAD since the one
issue (kept open) is being used for the two versions.
my 0.02c
John
>
> -dain
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jul 19, 2005, at 10:24 AM, David Jencks wrote:
> what is the proper use of Jira for defects that occur in multiple
> branches/releases? There are at least 2 issues fixed in head that
> need to be backported
If the fix is back ported, I would say you just set the fixed number
to M4. Once M4 is released it will appear as if it were originally
fixed in M4 and simply carried into M5+.
-dain
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
Posted by David Jencks <dj...@gluecode.com>.
what is the proper use of Jira for defects that occur in multiple
branches/releases? There are at least 2 issues fixed in head that need
to be backported
GERONIMO-645
GERONIMO-768
Also, I suggest that anyone changing a dependency version in M4 should
do the same in head at the same time. vice versa I'm less concerned
about
thanks
david jencks
On Jul 19, 2005, at 10:03 AM, David Blevins wrote:
> On Jul 19, 2005, at 7:06 AM, sissonj@insession.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Can everyone please check that any work they are planning on doing
>> for the M4 release is listed when you view the open issues for the
>> 1.0-M4 version, so we don't have any last minute surprises.
>>
>
> I pulled down the list of outstanding issues for M4:
>
> GERONIMO-518 Deploying Struts app fails on Logging
> ClassCastException
> GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
> GERONIMO-746 Move from commons_discovery SNAPSHOT to formal version
> GERONIMO-741 Move from ActiveIO 1.0 to ActiveIO 1.1
> GERONIMO-740 Move from ActiveMQ 3.1-SNAPSHOT to a formal release
> GERONIMO-755 Move from Scout (JAXR) version 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a
> formal version
> GERONIMO-756 Move ServiceMix from 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a formal or
> dated/versioned release for Geronimo M4
> GERONIMO-757 Move from jUDDI SNAPSHOT to formal version
> GERONIMO-745 Move from Axis 1.3-SNAPSHOT to formal version
> GERONIMO-760 Move tmporb SNAPSHOT dependency to a dated version in
> M4 Geronimo & OpenEJB branches
> GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
> GERONIMO-772 Move OpenEJB from jelly velocity tags SNAPSHOT to
> version 1.0
> GERONIMO-771 Move from custom cglib build version HEAD-06-06-05 to
> cglib-nodep-2.1_2.jar
>
> In that list, these are the only two non-dependency related items:
> GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
> GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
>
> Could I humbly submit that GERONIMO-664 is a new feature that could
> simply be documented as not working for M4?
>
> We could probably get the dependencies cleared up today and the CTS
> testing started and (knocking on wood) the release out by the end of
> the week.
>
> -David
>
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
Posted by Stefan Schmidt <sc...@gmail.com>.
sissonj@insession.com wrote:
>David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote on 20/07/2005 03:03:27 AM:
>
>
>
>>On Jul 19, 2005, at 7:06 AM, sissonj@insession.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Can everyone please check that any work they are planning on doing
>>>for the M4 release is listed when you view the open issues for the
>>>1.0-M4 version, so we don't have any last minute surprises.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I pulled down the list of outstanding issues for M4:
>>
>>GERONIMO-518 Deploying Struts app fails on Logging ClassCastException
>>GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
>>GERONIMO-746 Move from commons_discovery SNAPSHOT to formal version
>>GERONIMO-741 Move from ActiveIO 1.0 to ActiveIO 1.1
>>GERONIMO-740 Move from ActiveMQ 3.1-SNAPSHOT to a formal release
>>GERONIMO-755 Move from Scout (JAXR) version 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a
>>formal version
>>GERONIMO-756 Move ServiceMix from 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a formal or
>>dated/versioned release for Geronimo M4
>>GERONIMO-757 Move from jUDDI SNAPSHOT to formal version
>>GERONIMO-745 Move from Axis 1.3-SNAPSHOT to formal version
>>GERONIMO-760 Move tmporb SNAPSHOT dependency to a dated version in
>>M4 Geronimo & OpenEJB branches
>>GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
>>GERONIMO-772 Move OpenEJB from jelly velocity tags SNAPSHOT to
>>version 1.0
>>GERONIMO-771 Move from custom cglib build version HEAD-06-06-05 to
>>cglib-nodep-2.1_2.jar
>>
>>In that list, these are the only two non-dependency related items:
>>GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
>>GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
>>
>>Could I humbly submit that GERONIMO-664 is a new feature that could
>>simply be documented as not working for M4?
>>
>>We could probably get the dependencies cleared up today and the CTS
>>testing started and (knocking on wood) the release out by the end of
>>the week.
>>
>>-David
>>
>>
>
>Should GERONIMO-664 be updated to have M5 as the fixed version, since the
>if it is not working, it is not finished?
>
>I will update GERONIMO-728 to aim for M5, and see if we can get an updated
>Jetty release with it fixed by then, if not M5 then 1.0.
>
>John
>
>
>
Can someone please have a look into GERONIMO-785 which I find really
annoying and it destroys the new server startup screen :-). I think
users won't understand why this error happens... Would be nice to have
this fixed in M4.
Stefan
Re: Outstanding tasks for M4
Posted by si...@insession.com.
David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote on 20/07/2005 03:03:27 AM:
> On Jul 19, 2005, at 7:06 AM, sissonj@insession.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Can everyone please check that any work they are planning on doing
> > for the M4 release is listed when you view the open issues for the
> > 1.0-M4 version, so we don't have any last minute surprises.
> >
>
> I pulled down the list of outstanding issues for M4:
>
> GERONIMO-518 Deploying Struts app fails on Logging ClassCastException
> GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
> GERONIMO-746 Move from commons_discovery SNAPSHOT to formal version
> GERONIMO-741 Move from ActiveIO 1.0 to ActiveIO 1.1
> GERONIMO-740 Move from ActiveMQ 3.1-SNAPSHOT to a formal release
> GERONIMO-755 Move from Scout (JAXR) version 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a
> formal version
> GERONIMO-756 Move ServiceMix from 1.0-SNAPSHOT to a formal or
> dated/versioned release for Geronimo M4
> GERONIMO-757 Move from jUDDI SNAPSHOT to formal version
> GERONIMO-745 Move from Axis 1.3-SNAPSHOT to formal version
> GERONIMO-760 Move tmporb SNAPSHOT dependency to a dated version in
> M4 Geronimo & OpenEJB branches
> GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
> GERONIMO-772 Move OpenEJB from jelly velocity tags SNAPSHOT to
> version 1.0
> GERONIMO-771 Move from custom cglib build version HEAD-06-06-05 to
> cglib-nodep-2.1_2.jar
>
> In that list, these are the only two non-dependency related items:
> GERONIMO-664 Tomcat need webservices integrated
> GERONIMO-728 Jetty gives misleading NPE on "port in use" condition
>
> Could I humbly submit that GERONIMO-664 is a new feature that could
> simply be documented as not working for M4?
>
> We could probably get the dependencies cleared up today and the CTS
> testing started and (knocking on wood) the release out by the end of
> the week.
>
> -David
Should GERONIMO-664 be updated to have M5 as the fixed version, since the
if it is not working, it is not finished?
I will update GERONIMO-728 to aim for M5, and see if we can get an updated
Jetty release with it fixed by then, if not M5 then 1.0.
John