Re: Time for 9.12.0?

[Andrea Del Bene <an...@gmail.com>]

I think we are ready to proceed with the release. To port WICKET-6999 I've
added osgi configuration also to experimental modules modules for HTTP2:

https://github.com/apache/wicket/commit/3054cb6249dfdc61efa5ded2f419359edf847224

It should be ok, just let me know if I did something wrong.

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 9:16 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> PR #540 is ready for review. I completed updates for the wicket modules
> that we use and can spot check.
>
> Note— It would be contract-breaking to ship wicket-9.x w/ slf4j 2.0
> without this change in place, so next up it’d be good to back-port this to
> the wicket-9.x branch and get some testing underway.
>
> Completed:
>
> wicket-util
> wicket-request
> wicket-core
> wicket-auth-roles
> wicket-devutils
> wicket-extensions
> wicket-jmx
>
> Not yet updated:
>
> wicket-bean-validation
> wicket-cdi
> wicket-guice
> wicket-ioc
> wicket-native-websocket
> wicket-objectsizeof-agent
> wicket-spring
> wicket-velocity
>
> Thanks,
> Matt
>
> > On Sep 30, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Update — draft PR here: https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/540 <
> https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/540>
> >
> > This PR works for wicket-util and wicket-request modules right now.
> >
> > At issue is the use of enforcer plugin to limit configurations
> per-execution. maven-bundle-plugin runs at various phases and if there is
> not a config for each, the default behavior will execute on the last phase
> and we don’t get the version override as configured in the 'instructions'.
> I’m working on identifying the last goal that runs and perhaps we can get
> away with a single definition for that phase without changing the enforcer
> plugin rules.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Matt
> >
> >> On Sep 29, 2022, at 2:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delbene@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thank you Matt!
> >>
> >> On 29/09/22 16:43, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
> >>> I got pulled off onto other tasks. I will have time to get the PR out
> this weekend.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Matt Pavlovich
> >>>
> >>>> On Sep 29, 2022, at 6:19 AM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delbene@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I've lost track about this activity...what do we still miss to
> >>>> proceed with the new release?
> >>>> Thank you.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 6:19 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattrpav@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I can help w/ the OSGi import package. Should just be a simple
> override in
> >>>>> the bundle plugin config.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sep 15, 2022, at 3:00 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delbene@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> I agree with Martijn. Probably the downgrade is the best solution
> at the
> >>>>> moment. Like Martin suggests it would be nice to investigate how
> >>>>> Import-Package for OSGi are generated, but it's not a trivial task
> and we
> >>>>> need someone with more experience with OSGi
> >>>>>> On 14/09/22 09:22, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> >>>>>>> IIUC sfl4j 2.0.0 API is the same as 1.7.x API, so from a Wicket
> >>>>> perspective
> >>>>>>> it doesn't matter if we ship with 2.0.0 or 1.7.x, right?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If that is the case, I suggest we fall back to 1.7.x, and note
> that one
> >>>>> can
> >>>>>>> easily upgrade to 2.0.0 without issue if someone so desires.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This will keep it working for most folks, yet give an upgrade path
> for
> >>>>>>> those that wish so. It is harder to convince someone to downgrade
> from
> >>>>> 2.0
> >>>>>>> to 1.7 than to upgrade to 2.0 from 1.7.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But this is my .02 (which is even worth less with the current
> exchange
> >>>>>>> rates).
> >>>>>> ...😁
> >>>>>>> Martijn
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Andrea Del Bene.
> >>>> Apache Wicket committer.
> >
>
>

-- 
Andrea Del Bene.
Apache Wicket committer.