You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@aries.apache.org by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> on 2010/04/22 19:39:31 UTC
[VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
936975.
Modules staged at
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
are:
parent
eba-maven-plugin
testsupport
util
blueprint
jndi
transaction
web
application
jmx
jpa
samples
The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
The vote will be open for 72 hours.
[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1
Thanks,
Jeremy
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com>.
+1
I did the following:
- built (from both the source-release artifacts and svn tag)
- ran rat and it looked reasonable (although I was surprised that mvn
rat:check claimed failures for things like the manifest files - I
thought the maven-rat-plugin config was supposed to eliminate those)
- ran Blog & AriesTrader in both the equinox assemblies as well as a
Geronimo server pulling in the Aries 0.1-incubating artifacts I built.
All looked good to me.
Joe
On 4/22/10 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
--
Joe
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by David Bosschaert <da...@gmail.com>.
+1
David
On 22 April 2010 18:39, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Yes, this is also the same error as 6 of our transaction-itests, who
failed most times as reported by hudson build
Lin
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/22/10 6:38 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>> What happened to application? I see a tag but nothing in staging
>>
>> On my mac I get itest failures in transaction. I get them with trunk too.
>> The errors look something like this:
>>
>> Caused by: ERROR XBM0J: Directory
>> /private/var/folders/J0/J041U4tbGqeIsK+mFxmskk+++TI/-Tmp-/paxexam_runner_david/TESTDB
>> already exists.
>> at
>> org.apache.derby.iapi.error.StandardException.newException(Unknown Source)
>> at
>> org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService$9.run(Unknown
>> Source)
>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>> at
>> org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService.createServiceRoot(Unknown
>> Source)
>
> I've hit this error once before. It's a problem where a test DB that is
> created isn't destroyed when the tests complete and then you hit this error
> on all subsequent build attempts. I'm not even sure why the DB is created
> where it is instead of somewhere under target ... but if you remove the DB
> your test should complete.
>
> Joe
>
>>
>> ...
>>
>> I haven't checked the legal files yet but so far everything in staging
>> except samples (which needs application) builds OK for me (except for the
>> above test error that I'm not worrying about). Assuming the application
>> stuff can be located and the legal files look OK I will be voting +1.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>
>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>> 936975.
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>
>>> are:
>>>
>>> parent
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> testsupport
>>> util
>>> blueprint
>>> jndi
>>> transaction
>>> web
>>> application
>>> jmx
>>> jpa
>>> samples
>>>
>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jeremy
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joe
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/22/10 6:38 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> What happened to application? I see a tag but nothing in staging
>
> On my mac I get itest failures in transaction. I get them with trunk too. The errors look something like this:
>
> Caused by: ERROR XBM0J: Directory /private/var/folders/J0/J041U4tbGqeIsK+mFxmskk+++TI/-Tmp-/paxexam_runner_david/TESTDB already exists.
> at org.apache.derby.iapi.error.StandardException.newException(Unknown Source)
> at org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService$9.run(Unknown Source)
> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> at org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService.createServiceRoot(Unknown Source)
I've hit this error once before. It's a problem where a test DB that is
created isn't destroyed when the tests complete and then you hit this
error on all subsequent build attempts. I'm not even sure why the DB is
created where it is instead of somewhere under target ... but if you
remove the DB your test should complete.
Joe
>
> ...
>
> I haven't checked the legal files yet but so far everything in staging except samples (which needs application) builds OK for me (except for the above test error that I'm not worrying about). Assuming the application stuff can be located and the legal files look OK I will be voting +1.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>> 936975.
>>
>> Modules staged at
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>
>> are:
>>
>> parent
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> testsupport
>> util
>> blueprint
>> jndi
>> transaction
>> web
>> application
>> jmx
>> jpa
>> samples
>>
>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>
>
--
Joe
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 23 April 2010 14:56, Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/22/10 6:38 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>> What happened to application? I see a tag but nothing in staging
>
> Perhaps the mvn release:perform didn't complete?
Yes, I think that's what happened
>
>
>>
>> On my mac I get itest failures in transaction. I get them with trunk too.
>> The errors look something like this:
>>
>> Caused by: ERROR XBM0J: Directory
>> /private/var/folders/J0/J041U4tbGqeIsK+mFxmskk+++TI/-Tmp-/paxexam_runner_david/TESTDB
>> already exists.
>> at
>> org.apache.derby.iapi.error.StandardException.newException(Unknown Source)
>> at
>> org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService$9.run(Unknown
>> Source)
>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>> at
>> org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService.createServiceRoot(Unknown
>> Source)
>>
>> ...
>>
>> I haven't checked the legal files yet but so far everything in staging
>> except samples (which needs application) builds OK for me (except for the
>> above test error that I'm not worrying about). Assuming the application
>> stuff can be located and the legal files look OK I will be voting +1.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>
>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>> 936975.
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>
>>> are:
>>>
>>> parent
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> testsupport
>>> util
>>> blueprint
>>> jndi
>>> transaction
>>> web
>>> application
>>> jmx
>>> jpa
>>> samples
>>>
>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jeremy
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joe
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/22/10 6:38 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> What happened to application? I see a tag but nothing in staging
Perhaps the mvn release:perform didn't complete?
>
> On my mac I get itest failures in transaction. I get them with trunk too. The errors look something like this:
>
> Caused by: ERROR XBM0J: Directory /private/var/folders/J0/J041U4tbGqeIsK+mFxmskk+++TI/-Tmp-/paxexam_runner_david/TESTDB already exists.
> at org.apache.derby.iapi.error.StandardException.newException(Unknown Source)
> at org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService$9.run(Unknown Source)
> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> at org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService.createServiceRoot(Unknown Source)
>
> ...
>
> I haven't checked the legal files yet but so far everything in staging except samples (which needs application) builds OK for me (except for the above test error that I'm not worrying about). Assuming the application stuff can be located and the legal files look OK I will be voting +1.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>> 936975.
>>
>> Modules staged at
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>
>> are:
>>
>> parent
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> testsupport
>> util
>> blueprint
>> jndi
>> transaction
>> web
>> application
>> jmx
>> jpa
>> samples
>>
>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>
>
--
Joe
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
What happened to application? I see a tag but nothing in staging
On my mac I get itest failures in transaction. I get them with trunk too. The errors look something like this:
Caused by: ERROR XBM0J: Directory /private/var/folders/J0/J041U4tbGqeIsK+mFxmskk+++TI/-Tmp-/paxexam_runner_david/TESTDB already exists.
at org.apache.derby.iapi.error.StandardException.newException(Unknown Source)
at org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService$9.run(Unknown Source)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at org.apache.derby.impl.services.monitor.StorageFactoryService.createServiceRoot(Unknown Source)
...
I haven't checked the legal files yet but so far everything in staging except samples (which needs application) builds OK for me (except for the above test error that I'm not worrying about). Assuming the application stuff can be located and the legal files look OK I will be voting +1.
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Jeremy,
+1 from me. Please make sure the KEYS file is prominently present in
the distribution area and on the download pages.
thanks,
dims
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jeremy,
>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>
> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
> he'll ping me back later today.
>
>>
>> --kevan
>>
>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>> 936975.
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>
>>> are:
>>>
>>> parent
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> testsupport
>>> util
>>> blueprint
>>> jndi
>>> transaction
>>> web
>>> application
>>> jmx
>>> jpa
>>> samples
>>>
>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jeremy
>>
>>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 29, 2010, at 12:46 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 29 April 2010 17:11, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> I've raised it on legal-discuss. Has the following option been
>>> considered to satisfy the "... and include the License file at
>>> glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt.":
>>>
>>> Include that LICENSE.txt file separately from the project's LICENSE
>>> file in a directory called glassfish/bootstrap/legal directory within
>>> the jar/zip AND include the CDDL only in the project's LICENSE file
>>> located at the root of the zip.
>>
>> Well, you could remove the CDDL license from LICENSE and add an entry in LICENSE that points to the LICENSE.txt (i.e. the CDDL+GPL license file).
>
> I was thinking keep the CDDL license in LICENSE, and not add the GPL
> portion. The LICENSE would then represent the licensing of the files
> in the zip - as we have elected to license the two schema files as
> CDDL.
I don't think that's correct. I do think you could add a note to the LICENSE file (preceding the CDDL+GPL license) that states we are choosing the CDDL license.
>
>> Something like 'licenses/GLASSFISH-LICENSE.txt'. Some projects follow similar schemes -- one AL2 LICENSE file with multiple licenses in a 'license' subdirectory.
>
> This would be to satisfy the text in the header in the schema file
> which says "... and include the License file at
> glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt." ... so this specifically says
> to include the License file rather than append the License file to the
> one we have.
IMO, the intent of "include the license file" is to include the content of the license file.
>
>> My personal preference (Geronimo consumes a lot of artifacts) is to have all licensing information within the LICENSE file. It's much easier for consumers of your artifacts to review/follow...
>
> Which would normally be mine too, but I was trying to avoid confusing
> consumers who review the LICENSE file and on doing so would see 'GPL'
> even though none of the artifacts in the zip are licensed under the
> GPL. AIUI, while the schema files were originally CDDL+GPL, because
> we've elected to use the CDDL license, any consumers of our package
> cannot subsequently relicense them as GPL.
You are correct. IIUC, consumers of the Aries' package cannot reapply the GPL portion of the CDDL+GPL dual license.
>
> I think both options have merits and pitfalls and since I want to get
> on and create a new RC and the most agreed on approach is to put the
> full CDDL+GPL in the LICENSE file, then that is what I'll do.
>
> Thanks though, I do appreciate the discussion.
No problem. And thanks for working though these issues! First releases for a project are typically difficult. And as we've discovered, there are inconsistencies within the ASF -- I've found licensing to be a process of refinement...
If avoiding confusion is really a goal, then the solution is to stop including CDDL+GPL dual licensed artifacts. Changing the licensing information to avoid "confusion" isn't the answer.
--kevan
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 29 April 2010 17:11, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> I've raised it on legal-discuss. Has the following option been
>> considered to satisfy the "... and include the License file at
>> glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt.":
>>
>> Include that LICENSE.txt file separately from the project's LICENSE
>> file in a directory called glassfish/bootstrap/legal directory within
>> the jar/zip AND include the CDDL only in the project's LICENSE file
>> located at the root of the zip.
>
> Well, you could remove the CDDL license from LICENSE and add an entry in LICENSE that points to the LICENSE.txt (i.e. the CDDL+GPL license file).
I was thinking keep the CDDL license in LICENSE, and not add the GPL
portion. The LICENSE would then represent the licensing of the files
in the zip - as we have elected to license the two schema files as
CDDL.
> Something like 'licenses/GLASSFISH-LICENSE.txt'. Some projects follow similar schemes -- one AL2 LICENSE file with multiple licenses in a 'license' subdirectory.
This would be to satisfy the text in the header in the schema file
which says "... and include the License file at
glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt." ... so this specifically says
to include the License file rather than append the License file to the
one we have.
>My personal preference (Geronimo consumes a lot of artifacts) is to have all licensing information within the LICENSE file. It's much easier for consumers of your artifacts to review/follow...
Which would normally be mine too, but I was trying to avoid confusing
consumers who review the LICENSE file and on doing so would see 'GPL'
even though none of the artifacts in the zip are licensed under the
GPL. AIUI, while the schema files were originally CDDL+GPL, because
we've elected to use the CDDL license, any consumers of our package
cannot subsequently relicense them as GPL.
I think both options have merits and pitfalls and since I want to get
on and create a new RC and the most agreed on approach is to put the
full CDDL+GPL in the LICENSE file, then that is what I'll do.
Thanks though, I do appreciate the discussion.
>
> --kevan
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 28, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> I've raised it on legal-discuss. Has the following option been
> considered to satisfy the "... and include the License file at
> glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt.":
>
> Include that LICENSE.txt file separately from the project's LICENSE
> file in a directory called glassfish/bootstrap/legal directory within
> the jar/zip AND include the CDDL only in the project's LICENSE file
> located at the root of the zip.
Well, you could remove the CDDL license from LICENSE and add an entry in LICENSE that points to the LICENSE.txt (i.e. the CDDL+GPL license file). Something like 'licenses/GLASSFISH-LICENSE.txt'. Some projects follow similar schemes -- one AL2 LICENSE file with multiple licenses in a 'license' subdirectory. My personal preference (Geronimo consumes a lot of artifacts) is to have all licensing information within the LICENSE file. It's much easier for consumers of your artifacts to review/follow...
--kevan
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
I've raised it on legal-discuss. Has the following option been
considered to satisfy the "... and include the License file at
glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt.":
Include that LICENSE.txt file separately from the project's LICENSE
file in a directory called glassfish/bootstrap/legal directory within
the jar/zip AND include the CDDL only in the project's LICENSE file
located at the root of the zip.
Cheers,
Jeremy
On 28 April 2010 14:41, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yep, after recent discussions about this on the Geronimo lists, we'll be
> updating the text in the OpenJPA licenses for our next set of release
> artifacts.
>
> -Donald
>
>
> On 4/27/10 5:43 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>> On 27 April 2010 15:51, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Jeremy,
>>>>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>>>>
>>>> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
>>>> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
>>>> he'll ping me back later today.
>>>
>>> So reviewing a Geronimo release (which had this same issue) made me come back and take a look at Aries.
>>>
>>> For dual license files like: jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc
>>>
>>> I believe we should be including both licenses (as explained in the header of the files). We are currently only including the CDDL license (this may have been my mistake -- in saying the LICENSE information in the RC1 jar file was correct...). I think we should be including the full license text from https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html (i.e. both licenses), then choosing the CDDL license in the NOTICE file.
>>>
>>> If we were only including the CDDL license in the RC1 jar file, then I should have caught this last time... Apologies.
>>>
>>> If others agree, afraid we'll need to update...
>>
>> Is there a precedent for this? The recent 2.0.0 OpenJPA binary and
>> source zip have a LICENSE.txt with just the CDDL in it, no GPL license
>> text. Has this been discussed on a list somewhere - I couldn't see
>> anything recently on legal-discuss@ - it seems there is some
>> inconsistency.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>>
>>>
>>> --kevan
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Yep, after recent discussions about this on the Geronimo lists, we'll be
updating the text in the OpenJPA licenses for our next set of release
artifacts.
-Donald
On 4/27/10 5:43 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 27 April 2010 15:51, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Jeremy,
>>>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>>>
>>> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
>>> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
>>> he'll ping me back later today.
>>
>> So reviewing a Geronimo release (which had this same issue) made me come back and take a look at Aries.
>>
>> For dual license files like: jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc
>>
>> I believe we should be including both licenses (as explained in the header of the files). We are currently only including the CDDL license (this may have been my mistake -- in saying the LICENSE information in the RC1 jar file was correct...). I think we should be including the full license text from https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html (i.e. both licenses), then choosing the CDDL license in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> If we were only including the CDDL license in the RC1 jar file, then I should have caught this last time... Apologies.
>>
>> If others agree, afraid we'll need to update...
>
> Is there a precedent for this? The recent 2.0.0 OpenJPA binary and
> source zip have a LICENSE.txt with just the CDDL in it, no GPL license
> text. Has this been discussed on a list somewhere - I couldn't see
> anything recently on legal-discuss@ - it seems there is some
> inconsistency.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
>>
>> --kevan
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 27, 2010, at 5:43 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 27 April 2010 15:51, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Jeremy,
>>>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>>>
>>> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
>>> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
>>> he'll ping me back later today.
>>
>> So reviewing a Geronimo release (which had this same issue) made me come back and take a look at Aries.
>>
>> For dual license files like: jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc
>>
>> I believe we should be including both licenses (as explained in the header of the files). We are currently only including the CDDL license (this may have been my mistake -- in saying the LICENSE information in the RC1 jar file was correct...). I think we should be including the full license text from https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html (i.e. both licenses), then choosing the CDDL license in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> If we were only including the CDDL license in the RC1 jar file, then I should have caught this last time... Apologies.
>>
>> If others agree, afraid we'll need to update...
>
> Is there a precedent for this? The recent 2.0.0 OpenJPA binary and
> source zip have a LICENSE.txt with just the CDDL in it, no GPL license
> text. Has this been discussed on a list somewhere - I couldn't see
> anything recently on legal-discuss@ - it seems there is some
> inconsistency.
Don't know. Geronimo is following this general scheme -- though I expect there are also instances where this may not followed for Geronimo. We can ask on legal-discuss...
This is how I interpret the instructions in the header for https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/trunk/jpa/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc ...
--kevan
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 27 April 2010 15:51, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jeremy,
>>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>>
>> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
>> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
>> he'll ping me back later today.
>
> So reviewing a Geronimo release (which had this same issue) made me come back and take a look at Aries.
>
> For dual license files like: jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc
>
> I believe we should be including both licenses (as explained in the header of the files). We are currently only including the CDDL license (this may have been my mistake -- in saying the LICENSE information in the RC1 jar file was correct...). I think we should be including the full license text from https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html (i.e. both licenses), then choosing the CDDL license in the NOTICE file.
>
> If we were only including the CDDL license in the RC1 jar file, then I should have caught this last time... Apologies.
>
> If others agree, afraid we'll need to update...
Is there a precedent for this? The recent 2.0.0 OpenJPA binary and
source zip have a LICENSE.txt with just the CDDL in it, no GPL license
text. Has this been discussed on a list somewhere - I couldn't see
anything recently on legal-discuss@ - it seems there is some
inconsistency.
Thanks,
Jeremy
>
> --kevan
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jeremy,
>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>
> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
> he'll ping me back later today.
So reviewing a Geronimo release (which had this same issue) made me come back and take a look at Aries.
For dual license files like: jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc
I believe we should be including both licenses (as explained in the header of the files). We are currently only including the CDDL license (this may have been my mistake -- in saying the LICENSE information in the RC1 jar file was correct...). I think we should be including the full license text from https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html (i.e. both licenses), then choosing the CDDL license in the NOTICE file.
If we were only including the CDDL license in the RC1 jar file, then I should have caught this last time... Apologies.
If others agree, afraid we'll need to update...
--kevan
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jeremy,
> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
he'll ping me back later today.
>
> --kevan
>
> On Apr 22, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>> 936975.
>>
>> Modules staged at
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>
>> are:
>>
>> parent
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> testsupport
>> util
>> blueprint
>> jndi
>> transaction
>> web
>> application
>> jmx
>> jpa
>> samples
>>
>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
Jeremy,
I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
--kevan
On Apr 22, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
RE: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org>.
+1 from me too.
----------------------------------------
> From: vmahrwald@googlemail.com
> To: aries-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:01:32 +0100
>
> +1 (with the assumption we are releasing for 1.6 only)
>
> On 22 Apr 2010, at 18:39, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>> 936975.
>>
>> Modules staged at
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>
>> are:
>>
>> parent
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> testsupport
>> util
>> blueprint
>> jndi
>> transaction
>> web
>> application
>> jmx
>> jpa
>> samples
>>
>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>
_________________________________________________________________
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Valentin Mahrwald <vm...@googlemail.com>.
+1 (with the assumption we are releasing for 1.6 only)
On 22 Apr 2010, at 18:39, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Ian Robinson <ia...@googlemail.com>.
+1
On 26/04/2010 23:56, Kevan Miller wrote:
> Here's my +1.
>
> Checked signature and checksums. RAT looks good. Build looks good. Spot check of license/notice/disclaimer all look good.
>
> --kevan
> On Apr 23, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>
>> On 23 April 2010 18:07, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm fine with belatedly requiring java 6 and continuing the vote after application is staged to an additional staging repo.
>>>
>> We wouldn't be belatedly requiring java 6, because of these issues we
>> would be requiring java 6 in this release. I've uploaded the
>> application modules and they are available here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-015/
>>
>> Please consider the modules in this repository a part of the release.
>> The release continues to depend on Java 6.
>>
>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>> On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>>>>>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>>>>>>
>>>>> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
>>>>> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
>>>>> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
>>>>> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
>>>>> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
>>>>> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>>>>>
>>>> I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>>>>>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>>>>>> issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>>>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>>>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>>>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>>>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> parent
>>>>>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>>>>>> util
>>>>>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
Here's my +1.
Checked signature and checksums. RAT looks good. Build looks good. Spot check of license/notice/disclaimer all look good.
--kevan
On Apr 23, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 23 April 2010 18:07, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I'm fine with belatedly requiring java 6 and continuing the vote after application is staged to an additional staging repo.
>
> We wouldn't be belatedly requiring java 6, because of these issues we
> would be requiring java 6 in this release. I've uploaded the
> application modules and they are available here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-015/
>
> Please consider the modules in this repository a part of the release.
> The release continues to depend on Java 6.
>
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>>>>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>>>>
>>>> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
>>>> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
>>>> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
>>>> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
>>>> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
>>>> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>>>>
>>>> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>>>
>>> I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>>>>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>>>>> issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> parent
>>>>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>>>>> util
>>>>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Joe
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 23 April 2010 18:42, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> All the source zips build into something reasonable looking (modulo test failures in transaction)
> Legal files pass my limited scrutiny :-)
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Apr 23, 2010, at 10:24 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 23 April 2010 18:07, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> I'm fine with belatedly requiring java 6 and continuing the vote after application is staged to an additional staging repo.
>>
>> We wouldn't be belatedly requiring java 6, because of these issues we
>> would be requiring java 6 in this release. I've uploaded the
>> application modules and they are available here:
>>
>
> I said "belatedly" because this was not stated clearly as a prerequisite and the poms lead one to think java 5 is sufficient.
Ok sorry I misunderstood. Thanks for the +1
>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-015/
>>
>> Please consider the modules in this repository a part of the release.
>> The release continues to depend on Java 6.
>>
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>> On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>>>>>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
>>>>> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
>>>>> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
>>>>> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
>>>>> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
>>>>> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>>>>
>>>> I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>>>>>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>>>>>> issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>>>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>>>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>>>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>>>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> parent
>>>>>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>>>>>> util
>>>>>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
+1
All the source zips build into something reasonable looking (modulo test failures in transaction)
Legal files pass my limited scrutiny :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2010, at 10:24 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 23 April 2010 18:07, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I'm fine with belatedly requiring java 6 and continuing the vote after application is staged to an additional staging repo.
>
> We wouldn't be belatedly requiring java 6, because of these issues we
> would be requiring java 6 in this release. I've uploaded the
> application modules and they are available here:
>
I said "belatedly" because this was not stated clearly as a prerequisite and the poms lead one to think java 5 is sufficient.
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-015/
>
> Please consider the modules in this repository a part of the release.
> The release continues to depend on Java 6.
>
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>>>>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>>>>
>>>> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
>>>> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
>>>> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
>>>> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
>>>> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
>>>> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>>>>
>>>> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>>>
>>> I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>>>>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>>>>> issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> parent
>>>>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>>>>> util
>>>>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Joe
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 23 April 2010 18:07, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm fine with belatedly requiring java 6 and continuing the vote after application is staged to an additional staging repo.
We wouldn't be belatedly requiring java 6, because of these issues we
would be requiring java 6 in this release. I've uploaded the
application modules and they are available here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-015/
Please consider the modules in this repository a part of the release.
The release continues to depend on Java 6.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>> On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>>>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>>>
>>> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
>>> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
>>> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
>>> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
>>> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
>>> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>>>
>>> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>>
>> I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>>>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>>>> issue.
>>>>
>>>> Lin
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>>>> problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> parent
>>>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>>>> util
>>>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joe
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
I'm fine with belatedly requiring java 6 and continuing the vote after application is staged to an additional staging repo.
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>>
>> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
>> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
>> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
>> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
>> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
>> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>>
>> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>
> I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
>
> Joe
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>>> issue.
>>>
>>> Lin
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>>
>>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>>
>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>
>>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>>
>>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>>
>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>>
>>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>>> problem.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> parent
>>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>>> util
>>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>> web
>>>>>>> application
>>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joe
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 4/23/10 10:06 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun<li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
>> otherwise we would get compile error.
>
> This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
> transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
> interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
> on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
> java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
> unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
>
> Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
I was already assuming that it was a prereq.
Joe
>
>>
>> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
>> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
>> issue.
>>
>> Lin
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera<li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>>
>>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>>
>>>> <plugin>
>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>>> <configuration>
>>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>>> </configuration>
>>>> </plugin>
>>>>
>>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>>
>>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>>
>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>>
>>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>>> problem.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> parent
>>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>>> testsupport
>>>>>> util
>>>>>> blueprint
>>>>>> jndi
>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>> web
>>>>>> application
>>>>>> jmx
>>>>>> jpa
>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
Joe
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 23 April 2010 13:54, Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
> otherwise we would get compile error.
This is true. There is a problem with the ConnectionWrapper class in
transaction-wrappers. It implements java.sql.Connection. That
interface had methods added to it in java 1.6 which have new classes
on their signatures ...e.g. NClob. So either ConnectionWrapper needs
java 6 or it needs java 5 but it can't be written to use both ...
unless we do some fancy trickery with dynamic proxies.
Is having java 6 as a prereq a problem for anyone?
>
> In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
> required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
> issue.
>
> Lin
>
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>>
>>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>>> being used. Although we use:
>>>
>>> <plugin>
>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>> <configuration>
>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>> </configuration>
>>> </plugin>
>>>
>>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>>
>> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>>
>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>>
>> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
>> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
>> problem.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>>> 936975.
>>>>>
>>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>>
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>>
>>>>> are:
>>>>>
>>>>> parent
>>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>>> testsupport
>>>>> util
>>>>> blueprint
>>>>> jndi
>>>>> transaction
>>>>> web
>>>>> application
>>>>> jmx
>>>>> jpa
>>>>> samples
>>>>>
>>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1
>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
I was under the impression that we have to build aries using 1.6,
otherwise we would get compile error.
In any way, we do want to specify/check in the root pom that the
required level of JDK is used but I don't think this is a stop ship
issue.
Lin
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>>
>> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
>> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
>> being used. Although we use:
>>
>> <plugin>
>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>> <configuration>
>> <source>1.5</source>
>> <target>1.5</target>
>> </configuration>
>> </plugin>
>>
>> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
>> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>
> So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
>
> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
>
> Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
> org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
> problem.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>>> 936975.
>>>>
>>>> Modules staged at
>>>>
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>>
>>>> are:
>>>>
>>>> parent
>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>> testsupport
>>>> util
>>>> blueprint
>>>> jndi
>>>> transaction
>>>> web
>>>> application
>>>> jmx
>>>> jpa
>>>> samples
>>>>
>>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1
>>>> [ ] +0
>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 23 April 2010 11:14, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
>> not have a compiler check in the POM?
>
> I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
> is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
> being used. Although we use:
>
> <plugin>
> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> <configuration>
> <source>1.5</source>
> <target>1.5</target>
> </configuration>
> </plugin>
>
> in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
> users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
So, I was just thinking of ways to ensure the we use jdk 1.5. Here's one way:
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/examples/compile-using-different-jdk.html
Which works for me: java -version gives me 1.6 and then building
org.apache.aries.util-0.1-incubating gives the IOException compile
problem.
>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>> 936975.
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>
>>> are:
>>>
>>> parent
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> testsupport
>>> util
>>> blueprint
>>> jndi
>>> transaction
>>> web
>>> application
>>> jmx
>>> jpa
>>> samples
>>>
>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jeremy
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 22 April 2010 21:12, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors. Should we
> not have a compiler check in the POM?
I was using 1.6. Trying again with 1.5 the first compile error I get
is in 'util' because a method on IOException introduced in 1.6 is
being used. Although we use:
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
<source>1.5</source>
<target>1.5</target>
</configuration>
</plugin>
in the pom that doesn't mean we get the 1.5 libraries. Since we want
users to be able to use 1.5, I'll need to respin.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
> On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>
>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>> 936975.
>>
>> Modules staged at
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>
>> are:
>>
>> parent
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> testsupport
>> util
>> blueprint
>> jndi
>> transaction
>> web
>> application
>> jmx
>> jpa
>> samples
>>
>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
I tried to build this under JDK 1.5 and got compilation errors.
Should we not have a compiler check in the POM?
Regards,
Alan
On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 19:39, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Mark Nuttall <mn...@apache.org>.
+1
On 22 April 2010 18:39, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Graham Charters <gc...@googlemail.com>.
+1
On 26 April 2010 14:36, Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> On 26 April 2010 14:28, Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 & Thanks for pulling the release together!
>>
>> Lin
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>> 936975.
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>
>>> are:
>>>
>>> parent
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> testsupport
>>> util
>>> blueprint
>>> jndi
>>> transaction
>>> web
>>> application
>>> jmx
>>> jpa
>>> samples
>>>
>>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alasdair Nottingham
> not@apache.org
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
+1
On 26 April 2010 14:28, Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 & Thanks for pulling the release together!
>
> Lin
>
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>> 936975.
>>
>> Modules staged at
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>
>> are:
>>
>> parent
>> eba-maven-plugin
>> testsupport
>> util
>> blueprint
>> jndi
>> transaction
>> web
>> application
>> jmx
>> jpa
>> samples
>>
>> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy
>>
>
--
Alasdair Nottingham
not@apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
+1 & Thanks for pulling the release together!
Lin
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've staged the second release candidate for Aries (Incubating) v0.1.
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 936975.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> are:
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> application
> jmx
> jpa
> samples
>
> The RAT and IANAL bulid checks passed.
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>