[VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
MyFaces core out.

Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]

The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
for binary and source packages).

The release notes could be found at [4].

Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with myfaces-api.

Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!

Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
 +1 votes (see [3]).

------------------------------------------------
[ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
  and why..............
------------------------------------------------

Thanks,
Leonardo Uribe

[1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
 [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
[3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
 [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

+1

regards,
gerhard

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces



2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>

> Hi,
>
> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
> MyFaces core out.
>
> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>
> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
> for binary and source packages).
>
> The release notes could be found at [4].
>
> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
> myfaces-api.
>
> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>
> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>  and why..............
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks,
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>  [4]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>]

+1 for a new alpha release. Actually I support everything in the
process that allows bugs to be detected early.

Though, I haven't seen much MF 2.0 user activity until now (mailing
list activity, issues...). We have some catching up to do with
Mojarra.

/JK


2009/12/29 Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> +1 for a beta release.
>
> As far as I know there are just a few more things to do, mostly regarding
> f:ajax and some other minor issues.
>
> I am currently working on MYFACES-2363 - this will be in place soon!
>
> Regards,
>
> Jakob Korherr
>
> 2009/12/29 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a
>> release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.
>>
>> My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe
>> we should release as beta or release candidate).
>>
>> MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
>> responses
>> MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
>> getProjectStage
>> Commit all pending patches.
>> Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component
>> generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
>> property).
>>
>> Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as
>> these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>> 2009/12/29 Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> I would say definitely release a new one...
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> cool.
>>>>
>>>> Leo, all:
>>>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
>>>> coming in, and producing some
>>>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>>>>
>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Hi
>>>> >
>>>> > I deploy a snapshot here:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>>>> >
>>>> > regards,
>>>> >
>>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>>> >
>>>> > 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
>>>> >> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
>>>> >> some guys on this thread do...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> /JK
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
>>>> >> > Many thanks for applying this!
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would
>>>> >> > be
>>>> >> > great
>>>> >> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > thanks
>>>> >> > david jencks
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> David, thanks for the patch
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> -Matthias
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan
>>>> >> >> <da...@gmail.com>
>>>> >> >> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't
>>>> >> >>> take
>>>> >> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the
>>>> >> >>> patch.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>> <ma...@apache.org>
>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>> Hey David,
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>>> >> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>>>> >> >>>>> patch.  The
>>>> >> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not
>>>> >> >>>>> sure
>>>> >> >>>>> how to
>>>> >> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>>> >> >>>>> repetition, for
>>>> >> >>>>> which I apologize.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> :-) No worries
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>>> >> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>>>> >> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are
>>>> >> >>>>> really
>>>> >> >>>>> hard to
>>>> >> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting
>>>> >> >>>>> rules,
>>>> >> >>>>> I think
>>>> >> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>>>> >> >>>>> clearer.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> +1 on a patch
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If
>>>> >> >>>>> you
>>>> >> >>>>> compile
>>>> >> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run
>>>> >> >>>>> into
>>>> >> >>>>> some
>>>> >> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a
>>>> >> >>>>> Servlet
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.5 type
>>>> >> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you
>>>> >> >>>>> do
>>>> >> >>>>> the
>>>> >> >>>>> reverse.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>>>> >> >>>>> patch does
>>>> >> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>>> >> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as
>>>> >> >>>>> well,
>>>> >> >>>>> but we had
>>>> >> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a
>>>> >> >>>>> lot of
>>>> >> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
>>>> >> >>>>> current
>>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think it is now more clear
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>>>> >> >>>>> geronimo
>>>> >> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> Yes, correct
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would
>>>> >> >>>>> suggest
>>>> >> >>>>> adding it
>>>> >> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>>>> >> >>>>> different
>>>> >> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>>> >> >>>>> against.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> fair enough :-)
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>>> >> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> >> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>>> >> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>>> >> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> >> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>>> >> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>>> >> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>>> >> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>>>> >> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>>> >> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>>>> >> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>>>> >> >>>>> dependencies
>>>> >> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>>> >> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>>>> >> >>>>> currently
>>>> >> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.
>>>> >> >>>>>  I
>>>> >> >>>>> can't
>>>> >> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
>>>> >> >>>>> change
>>>> >> >>>>> would
>>>> >> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>>> >> >>>>> environments.  If
>>>> >> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>>>> >> >>>>> from working
>>>> >> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>>>> >> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> -Matthias
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> thanks
>>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Scott
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Matthias,
>>>> >> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>>>> >> >>>>> package
>>>> >> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>>> >> >>>>> against, but
>>>> >> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with
>>>> >> >>>>> in an
>>>> >> >>>>> osgi
>>>> >> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not
>>>> >> >>>>> part
>>>> >> >>>>> of javaee
>>>> >> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec
>>>> >> >>>>> version
>>>> >> >>>>> should be
>>>> >> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>>> >> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3.0
>>>> >> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> against
>>>> >> >>>>> a
>>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>>> >> >>>>> servlet 2.5
>>>> >> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>>> >> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we
>>>> >> >>>>> can
>>>> >> >>>>> continue
>>>> >> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a
>>>> >> >>>>> suitable
>>>> >> >>>>> patch to
>>>> >> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>>> >> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces 2.
>>>> >> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the
>>>> >> >>>>> tck.
>>>> >> >>>>> many thanks
>>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>>> >> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Ivan,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>>> >> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> -Matthias
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version
>>>> >> >>>>> to
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks !
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> +1
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Hi,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release
>>>> >> >>>>> of
>>>> >> >>>>> Apache
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared"
>>>> >> >>>>> v4.0.1-alpha
>>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha
>>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha
>>>> >> >>>>>  [1]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1]
>>>> >> >>>>> and [3]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of
>>>> >> >>>>> three
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +0
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>>> >> >>>>> released,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  and why..............
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  [4]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> --
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Ivan
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> --
>>>> >> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> --
>>>> >> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> --
>>>> >> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Grant Smith
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

+1 for a beta release.

As far as I know there are just a few more things to do, mostly regarding
f:ajax and some other minor issues.

I am currently working on MYFACES-2363 - this will be in place soon!

Regards,

Jakob Korherr

2009/12/29 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>

> Hi
>
> Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a
> release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.
>
> My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe
> we should release as beta or release candidate).
>
> MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
> responses
> MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
> getProjectStage
> Commit all pending patches.
> Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component
> generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
> property).
>
> Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these
> issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> 2009/12/29 Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>
>
> I would say definitely release a new one...
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>wrote:
>>
>>> cool.
>>>
>>> Leo, all:
>>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
>>> coming in, and producing some
>>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>>>
>>> WDYT ?
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > I deploy a snapshot here:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>>> >
>>> > regards,
>>> >
>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>> >
>>> > 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
>>> >> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
>>> >> some guys on this thread do...
>>> >>
>>> >> /JK
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
>>> >> > Many thanks for applying this!
>>> >> >
>>> >> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would
>>> be
>>> >> > great
>>> >> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > thanks
>>> >> > david jencks
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> David, thanks for the patch
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> -Matthias
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <
>>> darkarena@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't
>>> take
>>> >> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the
>>> >> >>> patch.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>> matzew@apache.org>
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>> Hey David,
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>> >> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>>> >> >>>>> patch.  The
>>> >> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not
>>> sure
>>> >> >>>>> how to
>>> >> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>> >> >>>>> repetition, for
>>> >> >>>>> which I apologize.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> :-) No worries
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>> >> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>>> >> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are
>>> really
>>> >> >>>>> hard to
>>> >> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting
>>> rules,
>>> >> >>>>> I think
>>> >> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>>> >> >>>>> clearer.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> +1 on a patch
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If
>>> you
>>> >> >>>>> compile
>>> >> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run
>>> into
>>> >> >>>>> some
>>> >> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a
>>> Servlet
>>> >> >>>>> 2.5 type
>>> >> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you
>>> do
>>> >> >>>>> the
>>> >> >>>>> reverse.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>>> >> >>>>> patch does
>>> >> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>> >> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>>> >> >>>>> but we had
>>> >> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot
>>> of
>>> >> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
>>> current
>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> I think it is now more clear
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>>> >> >>>>> geronimo
>>> >> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Yes, correct
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would
>>> suggest
>>> >> >>>>> adding it
>>> >> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>>> >> >>>>> different
>>> >> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>> >> >>>>> against.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> fair enough :-)
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>> >> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> ===================================================================
>>> >> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>> >> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>> >> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> ===================================================================
>>> >> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>> >> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>> >> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>> >> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>>> >> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>> >> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>>> >> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>>> >> >>>>> dependencies
>>> >> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow
>>> myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>> >> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>>> >> >>>>> currently
>>> >> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.
>>>  I
>>> >> >>>>> can't
>>> >> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
>>> change
>>> >> >>>>> would
>>> >> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>> >> >>>>> environments.  If
>>> >> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>>> >> >>>>> from working
>>> >> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>>> >> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> -Matthias
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>> thanks
>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Scott
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Matthias,
>>> >> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>>> >> >>>>> package
>>> >> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>> >> >>>>> against, but
>>> >> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in
>>> an
>>> >> >>>>> osgi
>>> >> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not
>>> part
>>> >> >>>>> of javaee
>>> >> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>>> >> >>>>> should be
>>> >> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
>>> myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>> >> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3.0
>>> >> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
>>> against
>>> >> >>>>> a
>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>> >> >>>>> servlet 2.5
>>> >> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>> >> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we
>>> can
>>> >> >>>>> continue
>>> >> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a
>>> suitable
>>> >> >>>>> patch to
>>> >> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>> >> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>>> >> >>>>> myfaces 2.
>>> >> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>>> >> >>>>> many thanks
>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>> >> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Ivan,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>> >> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> -Matthias
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version
>>> to
>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Thanks !
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> +1
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Hi,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>>> >> >>>>> Apache
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared"
>>> v4.0.1-alpha
>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha
>>> [1]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha
>>>  [1]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and
>>> [3]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> myfaces-api.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of
>>> >> >>>>> three
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +0
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>> >> >>>>> released,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  and why..............
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Thanks,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  [4]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> --
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Ivan
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> --
>>> >> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> --
>>> >> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Grant Smith
>>
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>]

The new release won't start before January 10th!
So there is no need to hurry.

2009/12/30 Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>

> Let me get my checkin in before the release.  I'll try to do that
> tomorrow.  It's separating the ViewHandlerLanguage strategies into
> share.  This will also mean we'll require a new release of share.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 29, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > awesome!
> >
> > thanks Jacob and Leo!
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to
> >> do a
> >> release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.
> >>
> >> My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha
> >> (maybe we
> >> should release as beta or release candidate).
> >>
> >> MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
> >> responses
> >> MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
> >> getProjectStage
> >> Commit all pending patches.
> >> Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on
> >> component
> >> generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
> >> property).
> >>
> >> Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon
> >> as these
> >> issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.
> >>
> >> regards
> >>
> >> Leonardo Uribe
> >>
> >> 2009/12/29 Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>> I would say definitely release a new one...
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
> matzew@apache.org
> >>> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> cool.
> >>>>
> >>>> Leo, all:
> >>>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
> >>>> coming in, and producing some
> >>>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> WDYT ?
> >>>>
> >>>> -Matthias
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I deploy a snapshot here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some
> >>>>>> reason
> >>>>>> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm
> >>>>>> sure
> >>>>>> some guys on this thread do...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> /JK
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
> >>>>>>> Many thanks for applying this!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it
> >>>>>>> would
> >>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>> great
> >>>>>>> if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> thanks
> >>>>>>> david jencks
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> David, thanks for the patch
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Matthias
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan
> >>>>>>>> <da...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I
> >>>>>>>>> didn't
> >>>>>>>>> take
> >>>>>>>>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> patch.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hey David,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
> >>>>>>>>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the
> >>>>>>>>>>> proposed
> >>>>>>>>>>> patch.  The
> >>>>>>>>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm
> >>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>> sure
> >>>>>>>>>>> how to
> >>>>>>>>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
> >>>>>>>>>>> repetition, for
> >>>>>>>>>>> which I apologize.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> :-) No worries
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
> >>>>>>>>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could
> >>>>>>>>>>> provide
> >>>>>>>>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are
> >>>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>> hard to
> >>>>>>>>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting
> >>>>>>>>>>> rules,
> >>>>>>>>>>> I think
> >>>>>>>>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a
> >>>>>>>>>>> lot
> >>>>>>>>>>> clearer.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 on a patch
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be
> >>>>>>>>>>> problematic.  If
> >>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>>> compile
> >>>>>>>>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run
> >>>>>>>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>>>> some
> >>>>>>>>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a
> >>>>>>>>>>> Servlet
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.5 type
> >>>>>>>>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems
> >>>>>>>>>>> if you
> >>>>>>>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> reverse.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The
> >>>>>>>>>>> patch does
> >>>>>>>>>>> not change any dependencies.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for
> >>>>>>>>>>> instance,
> >>>>>>>>>>> builds
> >>>>>>>>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as
> >>>>>>>>>>> well,
> >>>>>>>>>>> but we had
> >>>>>>>>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and
> >>>>>>>>>>> a lot
> >>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
> >>>>>>>>>>> current
> >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I think it is now more clear
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean
> >>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>> geronimo
> >>>>>>>>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
> >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, correct
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would
> >>>>>>>>>>> suggest
> >>>>>>>>>>> adding it
> >>>>>>>>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we
> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> >>>>>>>>>>> different
> >>>>>>>>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what
> >>>>>>>>>>> myfaces
> >>>>>>>>>>> builds
> >>>>>>>>>>> against.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> fair enough :-)
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> So, here's the patch:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>> ==========================================================
> >>>>>>>>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
> >>>>>>>>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
> >>>>>>>>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.naming,
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>> ==========================================================
> >>>>>>>>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
> >>>>>>>>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
> >>>>>>>>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
> >>>>>>>>>>>                 </Export-Package>
> >>>>>>>>>>>                 <Import-Package>
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
> >>>>>>>>>>>                 </Import-Package>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the
> >>>>>>>>>>> maven
> >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies
> >>>>>>>>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow
> >>>>>>>>>>> myfaces
> >>>>>>>>>>> to be
> >>>>>>>>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.
> >>>>>>>>>>> That is
> >>>>>>>>>>> currently
> >>>>>>>>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2
> >>>>>>>>>>> integration.
> >>>>>>>>>>>  I
> >>>>>>>>>>> can't
> >>>>>>>>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
> >>>>>>>>>>> change
> >>>>>>>>>>> would
> >>>>>>>>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
> >>>>>>>>>>> environments.  If
> >>>>>>>>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working
> >>>>>>>>>>> scenario
> >>>>>>>>>>> from working
> >>>>>>>>>>> please explain what it is and how.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
> >>>>>>>>>> Let me give your patch a try.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> -Matthias
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks
> >>>>>>>>>>> david jencks
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Scott
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> David Jencks wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Matthias,
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The
> >>>>>>>>>>> osgi
> >>>>>>>>>>> package
> >>>>>>>>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
> >>>>>>>>>>> against, but
> >>>>>>>>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used
> >>>>>>>>>>> with in
> >>>>>>>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>>>>> osgi
> >>>>>>>>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is
> >>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>> part
> >>>>>>>>>>> of javaee
> >>>>>>>>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec
> >>>>>>>>>>> version
> >>>>>>>>>>> should be
> >>>>>>>>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
> >>>>>>>>>>> myfaces
> >>>>>>>>>>> to be
> >>>>>>>>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
> >>>>>>>>>>> servlet 3.0
> >>>>>>>>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
> >>>>>>>>>>> against
> >>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
> >>>>>>>>>>> servlet 2.5
> >>>>>>>>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this
> >>>>>>>>>>> so we
> >>>>>>>>>>> can
> >>>>>>>>>>> continue
> >>>>>>>>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a
> >>>>>>>>>>> suitable
> >>>>>>>>>>> patch to
> >>>>>>>>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
> >>>>>>>>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has
> >>>>>>>>>>> loaded
> >>>>>>>>>>> myfaces 2.
> >>>>>>>>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of
> >>>>>>>>>>> the tck.
> >>>>>>>>>>> many thanks
> >>>>>>>>>>> david jencks
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ivan,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
> >>>>>>>>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> -Matthias
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec
> >>>>>>>>>>> version
> >>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0 in
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks !
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha
> >>>>>>>>>>> release of
> >>>>>>>>>>> Apache
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> MyFaces core out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following
> >>>>>>>>>>> parts:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared"
> >>>>>>>>>>> v4.0.1-alpha
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-
> >>>>>>>>>>> alpha
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-
> >>>>>>>>>>> alpha
> >>>>>>>>>>>  [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account
> >>>>>>>>>>> ([1] and
> >>>>>>>>>>> [3]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> for binary and source packages).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities
> >>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> myfaces-api.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a
> >>>>>>>>>>> minimum of
> >>>>>>>>>>> three
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to
> >>>>>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>>> released,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  and why..............
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>  [4]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ivan
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>
> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Grant Smith
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>]

Let me get my checkin in before the release.  I'll try to do that
tomorrow.  It's separating the ViewHandlerLanguage strategies into
share.  This will also mean we'll require a new release of share.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 29, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
wrote:

> awesome!
>
> thanks Jacob and Leo!
>
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to
>> do a
>> release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.
>>
>> My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha
>> (maybe we
>> should release as beta or release candidate).
>>
>> MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
>> responses
>> MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
>> getProjectStage
>> Commit all pending patches.
>> Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on
>> component
>> generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
>> property).
>>
>> Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon
>> as these
>> issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>> 2009/12/29 Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> I would say definitely release a new one...
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> cool.
>>>>
>>>> Leo, all:
>>>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
>>>> coming in, and producing some
>>>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>>>>
>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>> I deploy a snapshot here:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some
>>>>>> reason
>>>>>> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm
>>>>>> sure
>>>>>> some guys on this thread do...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /JK
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
>>>>>>> Many thanks for applying this!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> great
>>>>>>> if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David, thanks for the patch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan
>>>>>>>> <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I
>>>>>>>>> didn't
>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> patch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hey David,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>>>>>>>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the
>>>>>>>>>>> proposed
>>>>>>>>>>> patch.  The
>>>>>>>>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm
>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>>>> how to
>>>>>>>>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>>>>>>>>>> repetition, for
>>>>>>>>>>> which I apologize.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> :-) No worries
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>>>>>>>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could
>>>>>>>>>>> provide
>>>>>>>>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are
>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>> hard to
>>>>>>>>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting
>>>>>>>>>>> rules,
>>>>>>>>>>> I think
>>>>>>>>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a
>>>>>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>>>>>> clearer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1 on a patch
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be
>>>>>>>>>>> problematic.  If
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> compile
>>>>>>>>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run
>>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a
>>>>>>>>>>> Servlet
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.5 type
>>>>>>>>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems
>>>>>>>>>>> if you
>>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> reverse.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.
>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>> patch does
>>>>>>>>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for
>>>>>>>>>>> instance,
>>>>>>>>>>> builds
>>>>>>>>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as
>>>>>>>>>>> well,
>>>>>>>>>>> but we had
>>>>>>>>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and
>>>>>>>>>>> a lot
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
>>>>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think it is now more clear
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> geronimo
>>>>>>>>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, correct
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would
>>>>>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>>>>>> adding it
>>>>>>>>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we
>>>>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what
>>>>>>>>>>> myfaces
>>>>>>>>>>> builds
>>>>>>>>>>> against.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> fair enough :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>>>>>>>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>>>>>> ==========================================================
>>>>>>>>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.naming,
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>>>>>>>>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>>>>>> ==========================================================
>>>>>>>>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>>>>>>>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>>>>>>>>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1)",
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>>>>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>>>>>>>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the
>>>>>>>>>>> maven
>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies
>>>>>>>>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow
>>>>>>>>>>> myfaces
>>>>>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>>>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.
>>>>>>>>>>> That is
>>>>>>>>>>> currently
>>>>>>>>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2
>>>>>>>>>>> integration.
>>>>>>>>>>>  I
>>>>>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>>>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>>>>>>>>>> environments.  If
>>>>>>>>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working
>>>>>>>>>>> scenario
>>>>>>>>>>> from working
>>>>>>>>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>>>>>>>>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias,
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The
>>>>>>>>>>> osgi
>>>>>>>>>>> package
>>>>>>>>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>>>>>>>>>> against, but
>>>>>>>>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used
>>>>>>>>>>> with in
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> osgi
>>>>>>>>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is
>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> part
>>>>>>>>>>> of javaee
>>>>>>>>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec
>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>> should be
>>>>>>>>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
>>>>>>>>>>> myfaces
>>>>>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>>>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>>>>>>>>>> servlet 3.0
>>>>>>>>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
>>>>>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>>>>>>>>>> servlet 2.5
>>>>>>>>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this
>>>>>>>>>>> so we
>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> continue
>>>>>>>>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a
>>>>>>>>>>> suitable
>>>>>>>>>>> patch to
>>>>>>>>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>>>>>>>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has
>>>>>>>>>>> loaded
>>>>>>>>>>> myfaces 2.
>>>>>>>>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of
>>>>>>>>>>> the tck.
>>>>>>>>>>> many thanks
>>>>>>>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ivan,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>>>>>>>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec
>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks !
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha
>>>>>>>>>>> release of
>>>>>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following
>>>>>>>>>>> parts:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared"
>>>>>>>>>>> v4.0.1-alpha
>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-
>>>>>>>>>>> alpha
>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-
>>>>>>>>>>> alpha
>>>>>>>>>>>  [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account
>>>>>>>>>>> ([1] and
>>>>>>>>>>> [3]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a
>>>>>>>>>>> minimum of
>>>>>>>>>>> three
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to
>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>> released,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  and why..............
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  [4]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Grant Smith
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

awesome!

thanks Jacob and Leo!

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a
> release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.
>
> My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we
> should release as beta or release candidate).
>
> MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
> responses
> MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
> getProjectStage
> Commit all pending patches.
> Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component
> generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
> property).
>
> Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these
> issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> 2009/12/29 Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>
>>
>> I would say definitely release a new one...
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> cool.
>>>
>>> Leo, all:
>>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
>>> coming in, and producing some
>>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>>>
>>> WDYT ?
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > I deploy a snapshot here:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>>> >
>>> > regards,
>>> >
>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>> >
>>> > 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
>>> >> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
>>> >> some guys on this thread do...
>>> >>
>>> >> /JK
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
>>> >> > Many thanks for applying this!
>>> >> >
>>> >> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would
>>> >> > be
>>> >> > great
>>> >> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > thanks
>>> >> > david jencks
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> David, thanks for the patch
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> -Matthias
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan
>>> >> >> <da...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't
>>> >> >>> take
>>> >> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the
>>> >> >>> patch.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>> <ma...@apache.org>
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>> Hey David,
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>> >> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>>> >> >>>>> patch.  The
>>> >> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not
>>> >> >>>>> sure
>>> >> >>>>> how to
>>> >> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>> >> >>>>> repetition, for
>>> >> >>>>> which I apologize.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> :-) No worries
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>> >> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>>> >> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are
>>> >> >>>>> really
>>> >> >>>>> hard to
>>> >> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting
>>> >> >>>>> rules,
>>> >> >>>>> I think
>>> >> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>>> >> >>>>> clearer.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> +1 on a patch
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If
>>> >> >>>>> you
>>> >> >>>>> compile
>>> >> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run
>>> >> >>>>> into
>>> >> >>>>> some
>>> >> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a
>>> >> >>>>> Servlet
>>> >> >>>>> 2.5 type
>>> >> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you
>>> >> >>>>> do
>>> >> >>>>> the
>>> >> >>>>> reverse.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>>> >> >>>>> patch does
>>> >> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>> >> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>>> >> >>>>> but we had
>>> >> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot
>>> >> >>>>> of
>>> >> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
>>> >> >>>>> current
>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> I think it is now more clear
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>>> >> >>>>> geronimo
>>> >> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Yes, correct
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would
>>> >> >>>>> suggest
>>> >> >>>>> adding it
>>> >> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>>> >> >>>>> different
>>> >> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>> >> >>>>> against.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> fair enough :-)
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>> >> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> ===================================================================
>>> >> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>> >> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>> >> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> ===================================================================
>>> >> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>> >> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>> >> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>> >> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>>> >> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>> >> >>>>> 3.1)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>> >> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>>> >> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>>> >> >>>>> dependencies
>>> >> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow
>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>> >> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>>> >> >>>>> currently
>>> >> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.
>>> >> >>>>>  I
>>> >> >>>>> can't
>>> >> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
>>> >> >>>>> change
>>> >> >>>>> would
>>> >> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>> >> >>>>> environments.  If
>>> >> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>>> >> >>>>> from working
>>> >> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>>> >> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> -Matthias
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>> thanks
>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Scott
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Matthias,
>>> >> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>>> >> >>>>> package
>>> >> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>> >> >>>>> against, but
>>> >> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in
>>> >> >>>>> an
>>> >> >>>>> osgi
>>> >> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not
>>> >> >>>>> part
>>> >> >>>>> of javaee
>>> >> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>>> >> >>>>> should be
>>> >> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>> >> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3.0
>>> >> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
>>> >> >>>>> against
>>> >> >>>>> a
>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>> >> >>>>> servlet 2.5
>>> >> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>> >> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we
>>> >> >>>>> can
>>> >> >>>>> continue
>>> >> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a
>>> >> >>>>> suitable
>>> >> >>>>> patch to
>>> >> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>> >> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>>> >> >>>>> myfaces 2.
>>> >> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>>> >> >>>>> many thanks
>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>> >> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Ivan,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>> >> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> -Matthias
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version
>>> >> >>>>> to
>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Thanks !
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> +1
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Hi,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>>> >> >>>>> Apache
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared"
>>> >> >>>>> v4.0.1-alpha
>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha
>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha
>>> >> >>>>>  [1]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and
>>> >> >>>>> [3]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> myfaces-api.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of
>>> >> >>>>> three
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +0
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>> >> >>>>> released,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  and why..............
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Thanks,
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>  [4]
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> --
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Ivan
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> --
>>> >> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> --
>>> >> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Grant Smith
>>
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>]

Hi

Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a
release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.

My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we
should release as beta or release candidate).

MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
responses
MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
getProjectStage
Commit all pending patches.
Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component
generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
property).

Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these
issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.

regards

Leonardo Uribe

2009/12/29 Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>

> I would say definitely release a new one...
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> cool.
>>
>> Leo, all:
>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
>> coming in, and producing some
>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > I deploy a snapshot here:
>> >
>> >
>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Leonardo Uribe
>> >
>> > 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
>> >> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>> >>
>> >> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
>> >> some guys on this thread do...
>> >>
>> >> /JK
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
>> >> > Many thanks for applying this!
>> >> >
>> >> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would
>> be
>> >> > great
>> >> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>> >> >
>> >> > thanks
>> >> > david jencks
>> >> >
>> >> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>> >> >>
>> >> >> David, thanks for the patch
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -Matthias
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <darkarena@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't
>> take
>> >> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the
>> >> >>> patch.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>> matzew@apache.org>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> Hey David,
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>> >> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>> >> >>>>> patch.  The
>> >> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not
>> sure
>> >> >>>>> how to
>> >> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>> >> >>>>> repetition, for
>> >> >>>>> which I apologize.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> :-) No worries
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>> >> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>> >> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are
>> really
>> >> >>>>> hard to
>> >> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting
>> rules,
>> >> >>>>> I think
>> >> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>> >> >>>>> clearer.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> +1 on a patch
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If
>> you
>> >> >>>>> compile
>> >> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
>> >> >>>>> some
>> >> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
>> >> >>>>> 2.5 type
>> >> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you
>> do
>> >> >>>>> the
>> >> >>>>> reverse.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>> >> >>>>> patch does
>> >> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>> >> >>>>> builds
>> >> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>> >> >>>>> but we had
>> >> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot
>> of
>> >> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
>> current
>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I think it is now more clear
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>> >> >>>>> geronimo
>> >> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Yes, correct
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would
>> suggest
>> >> >>>>> adding it
>> >> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>> >> >>>>> different
>> >> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>> >> >>>>> builds
>> >> >>>>> against.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> fair enough :-)
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
>> >> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>> >> >>>>>
>> ===================================================================
>> >> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>> >> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>> >> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>> 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>> >> >>>>>
>> ===================================================================
>> >> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>> >> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>> >> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>> >> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>> >> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>> 3.1)",
>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>> >> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>> >> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>> >> >>>>> dependencies
>> >> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow
>> myfaces
>> >> >>>>> to be
>> >> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>> >> >>>>> currently
>> >> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.
>>  I
>> >> >>>>> can't
>> >> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
>> change
>> >> >>>>> would
>> >> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>> >> >>>>> environments.  If
>> >> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>> >> >>>>> from working
>> >> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>> >> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> -Matthias
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> thanks
>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Scott
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Matthias,
>> >> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>> >> >>>>> package
>> >> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>> >> >>>>> against, but
>> >> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in
>> an
>> >> >>>>> osgi
>> >> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not
>> part
>> >> >>>>> of javaee
>> >> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>> >> >>>>> should be
>> >> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
>> myfaces
>> >> >>>>> to be
>> >> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>> >> >>>>> servlet 3.0
>> >> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
>> against
>> >> >>>>> a
>> >> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>> >> >>>>> servlet 2.5
>> >> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>> >> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we
>> can
>> >> >>>>> continue
>> >> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
>> >> >>>>> patch to
>> >> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>> >> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>> >> >>>>> myfaces 2.
>> >> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>> >> >>>>> many thanks
>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>> >> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Ivan,
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>> >> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> -Matthias
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Thanks !
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> +1
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Hi,
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>> >> >>>>> Apache
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
>> >> >>>>> [1]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha
>> [1]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha
>>  [1]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and
>> [3]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> myfaces-api.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of
>> >> >>>>> three
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> [ ] +0
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>> >> >>>>> released,
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  and why..............
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Thanks,
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>  [4]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> --
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Ivan
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> --
>> >> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >> >>
>> >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Grant Smith
>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>]

I would say definitely release a new one...

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>wrote:

> cool.
>
> Leo, all:
> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
> coming in, and producing some
> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>
> WDYT ?
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I deploy a snapshot here:
> >
> >
> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Leonardo Uribe
> >
> > 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
> >> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
> >>
> >> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
> >> some guys on this thread do...
> >>
> >> /JK
> >>
> >>
> >> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
> >> > Many thanks for applying this!
> >> >
> >> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would be
> >> > great
> >> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
> >> >
> >> > thanks
> >> > david jencks
> >> >
> >> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
> >> >>
> >> >> David, thanks for the patch
> >> >>
> >> >> -Matthias
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't
> take
> >> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the
> >> >>> patch.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Hey David,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
> >> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
> >> >>>>> patch.  The
> >> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
> >> >>>>> how to
> >> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
> >> >>>>> repetition, for
> >> >>>>> which I apologize.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> :-) No worries
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
> >> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
> >> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
> >> >>>>> hard to
> >> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
> >> >>>>> I think
> >> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
> >> >>>>> clearer.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> +1 on a patch
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If
> you
> >> >>>>> compile
> >> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
> >> >>>>> some
> >> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
> >> >>>>> 2.5 type
> >> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>> reverse.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
> >> >>>>> patch does
> >> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
> >> >>>>> builds
> >> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
> >> >>>>> but we had
> >> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot
> of
> >> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the
> current
> >> >>>>> dependencies.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I think it is now more clear
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
> >> >>>>> geronimo
> >> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
> >> >>>>> dependencies.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Yes, correct
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
> >> >>>>> adding it
> >> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
> >> >>>>> different
> >> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
> >> >>>>> builds
> >> >>>>> against.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> fair enough :-)
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
> >> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
> >> >>>>>
> ===================================================================
> >> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
> >> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
> >> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
> >> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> 3.1)",
> >> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
> >> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
> >> >>>>>
> ===================================================================
> >> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
> >> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
> >> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
> >> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
> >> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
> 3.1)",
> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
> >> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
> >> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
> >> >>>>> dependencies
> >> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
> >> >>>>> to be
> >> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
> >> >>>>> currently
> >> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
> >> >>>>> can't
> >> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed
> change
> >> >>>>> would
> >> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
> >> >>>>> environments.  If
> >> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
> >> >>>>> from working
> >> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
> >> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> -Matthias
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> thanks
> >> >>>>> david jencks
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Scott
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Matthias,
> >> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
> >> >>>>> package
> >> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
> >> >>>>> against, but
> >> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in
> an
> >> >>>>> osgi
> >> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
> >> >>>>> of javaee
> >> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
> >> >>>>> should be
> >> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for
> myfaces
> >> >>>>> to be
> >> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
> >> >>>>> servlet 3.0
> >> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces
> against
> >> >>>>> a
> >> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
> >> >>>>> servlet 2.5
> >> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
> >> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
> >> >>>>> continue
> >> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
> >> >>>>> patch to
> >> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
> >> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
> >> >>>>> myfaces 2.
> >> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
> >> >>>>> many thanks
> >> >>>>> david jencks
> >> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Ivan,
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
> >> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> -Matthias
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
> >> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Thanks !
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> +1
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Hi,
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
> >> >>>>> Apache
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
> >> >>>>> [1]
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha
> [1]
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha
>  [1]
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and
> [3]
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> myfaces-api.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of
> >> >>>>> three
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> [ ] +0
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
> >> >>>>> released,
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  and why..............
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>  [4]
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> --
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Ivan
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> --
> >> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Matthias Wessendorf
> >> >>
> >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>



-- 
Grant Smith

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

cool.

Leo, all:
do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
coming in, and producing some
alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)

WDYT ?

-Matthias

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I deploy a snapshot here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>
> regards,
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>
>>
>> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
>> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>>
>> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
>> some guys on this thread do...
>>
>> /JK
>>
>>
>> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
>> > Many thanks for applying this!
>> >
>> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would be
>> > great
>> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>> >
>> > thanks
>> > david jencks
>> >
>> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> >
>> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>> >>
>> >> David, thanks for the patch
>> >>
>> >> -Matthias
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't take
>> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the
>> >>> patch.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>>
>> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hey David,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>> >>>>> patch.  The
>> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
>> >>>>> how to
>> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>> >>>>> repetition, for
>> >>>>> which I apologize.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> :-) No worries
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
>> >>>>> hard to
>> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
>> >>>>> I think
>> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>> >>>>> clearer.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> +1 on a patch
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you
>> >>>>> compile
>> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
>> >>>>> some
>> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
>> >>>>> 2.5 type
>> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> reverse.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>> >>>>> patch does
>> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>> >>>>> builds
>> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>> >>>>> but we had
>> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
>> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current
>> >>>>> dependencies.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I think it is now more clear
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>> >>>>> geronimo
>> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>> >>>>> dependencies.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yes, correct
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
>> >>>>> adding it
>> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>> >>>>> different
>> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>> >>>>> builds
>> >>>>> against.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> fair enough :-)
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
>> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>> >>>>> ===================================================================
>> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
>> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>> >>>>> ===================================================================
>> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>> >>>>> dependencies
>> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
>> >>>>> to be
>> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>> >>>>> currently
>> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
>> >>>>> can't
>> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change
>> >>>>> would
>> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>> >>>>> environments.  If
>> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>> >>>>> from working
>> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Matthias
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> thanks
>> >>>>> david jencks
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Scott
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Matthias,
>> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>> >>>>> package
>> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>> >>>>> against, but
>> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an
>> >>>>> osgi
>> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
>> >>>>> of javaee
>> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>> >>>>> should be
>> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces
>> >>>>> to be
>> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>> >>>>> servlet 3.0
>> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>> >>>>> servlet 2.5
>> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
>> >>>>> continue
>> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
>> >>>>> patch to
>> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>> >>>>> myfaces 2.
>> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>> >>>>> many thanks
>> >>>>> david jencks
>> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Ivan,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -Matthias
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
>> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks !
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>> >>>>> Apache
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
>> >>>>> [1]
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> myfaces-api.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of
>> >>>>> three
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> [ ] +0
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>> >>>>> released,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  and why..............
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  [4]
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Ivan
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>>>
>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>
>> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >
>> >
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>]

Hi

I deploy a snapshot here:

http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/

regards,

Leonardo Uribe

2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>

> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>
> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
> some guys on this thread do...
>
> /JK
>
>
> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
> > Many thanks for applying this!
> >
> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would be
> great
> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
> >
> > thanks
> > david jencks
> >
> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >
> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
> >>
> >> David, thanks for the patch
> >>
> >> -Matthias
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't take
> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the patch.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hey David,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
> >>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
> >>>>> patch.  The
> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
> >>>>> how to
> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
> >>>>> repetition, for
> >>>>> which I apologize.
> >>>>
> >>>> :-) No worries
> >>>>
> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
> >>>>> hard to
> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
> >>>>> I think
> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
> >>>>> clearer.
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 on a patch
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you
> >>>>> compile
> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
> >>>>> some
> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
> >>>>> 2.5 type
> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> reverse.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
> >>>>> patch does
> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
> >>>>> builds
> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
> >>>>> but we had
> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current
> >>>>> dependencies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think it is now more clear
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
> >>>>> geronimo
> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
> >>>>> dependencies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, correct
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
> >>>>> adding it
> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
> >>>>> different
> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
> >>>>> builds
> >>>>> against.
> >>>>
> >>>> fair enough :-)
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
> >>>>> ===================================================================
> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
> >>>>> ===================================================================
> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
> >>>>> dependencies
> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
> >>>>> to be
> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
> >>>>> currently
> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
> >>>>> can't
> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change
> >>>>> would
> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
> >>>>> environments.  If
> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
> >>>>> from working
> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
> >>>>
> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Matthias
> >>>>
> >>>>> thanks
> >>>>> david jencks
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Scott
> >>>>>
> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Matthias,
> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
> >>>>> package
> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
> >>>>> against, but
> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an
> >>>>> osgi
> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
> >>>>> of javaee
> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
> >>>>> should be
> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces
> >>>>> to be
> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
> >>>>> servlet 3.0
> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against a
> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
> >>>>> servlet 2.5
> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
> >>>>> continue
> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
> >>>>> patch to
> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
> >>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
> >>>>> myfaces 2.
> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
> >>>>> many thanks
> >>>>> david jencks
> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ivan,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Matthias
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks !
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
> >>>>> Apache
> >>>>>
> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
> >>>>> [1]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
> >>>>>
> >>>>> myfaces-api.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [ ] +0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
> >>>>> released,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  and why..............
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  [4]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ivan
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>>
> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>>>
> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>
> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Jan-Kees van Andel <ja...@gmail.com>]

I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.

I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
some guys on this thread do...

/JK


2009/12/26 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>:
> Many thanks for applying this!
>
> If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would be great
> if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>>
>> David, thanks for the patch
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't take
>>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the patch.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey David,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>>>>> patch.  The
>>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
>>>>> how to
>>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>>>> repetition, for
>>>>> which I apologize.
>>>>
>>>> :-) No worries
>>>>
>>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
>>>>> hard to
>>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
>>>>> I think
>>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>>>>> clearer.
>>>>
>>>> +1 on a patch
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you
>>>>> compile
>>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
>>>>> some
>>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
>>>>> 2.5 type
>>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
>>>>> the
>>>>> reverse.
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>>>>> patch does
>>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>>>>> builds
>>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>>>>> but we had
>>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
>>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current
>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> I think it is now more clear
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>>>>> geronimo
>>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, correct
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
>>>>> adding it
>>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>>>>
>>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>>>>> different
>>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>>>>> builds
>>>>> against.
>>>>
>>>> fair enough :-)
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>>>> ===================================================================
>>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>>                   javax.naming,
>>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>>>> ===================================================================
>>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>>>>> dependencies
>>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
>>>>> to be
>>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>>>>> currently
>>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
>>>>> can't
>>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change
>>>>> would
>>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>>>> environments.  If
>>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>>>>> from working
>>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>>>
>>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Matthias,
>>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>>>>> package
>>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>>>> against, but
>>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an
>>>>> osgi
>>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
>>>>> of javaee
>>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>>>>> should be
>>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces
>>>>> to be
>>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>>>> servlet 3.0
>>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against a
>>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>>>> servlet 2.5
>>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
>>>>> continue
>>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
>>>>> patch to
>>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>>>>> myfaces 2.
>>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>>>>> many thanks
>>>>> david jencks
>>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ivan,
>>>>>
>>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
>>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>>>
>>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks !
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>>>>> Apache
>>>>>
>>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>>>
>>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
>>>>> [1]
>>>>>
>>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>>>
>>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>>>>
>>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>>>>>
>>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>>
>>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>>
>>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>>>
>>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>>>>
>>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>>>> released,
>>>>>
>>>>>  and why..............
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>>>
>>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>>
>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>>>
>>>>>  [4]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>
>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>]

Many thanks for applying this!

If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies, it would be  
great if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.

thanks
david jencks

On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:

> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>
> David, thanks for the patch
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't take
>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the  
>> patch.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey David,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>>>> patch.  The
>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
>>>> how to
>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>>> repetition, for
>>>> which I apologize.
>>>
>>> :-) No worries
>>>
>>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
>>>> hard to
>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
>>>> I think
>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>>>> clearer.
>>>
>>> +1 on a patch
>>>
>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you
>>>> compile
>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
>>>> some
>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
>>>> 2.5 type
>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
>>>> the
>>>> reverse.
>>>>
>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>>>> patch does
>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>>
>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>>>> builds
>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>>>> but we had
>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>>>
>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the  
>>>> current
>>>> dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>>
>>> I think it is now more clear
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>>>> geronimo
>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>>> dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>>
>>> Yes, correct
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
>>>> adding it
>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>>>
>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>>>> different
>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>>>> builds
>>>> against.
>>>
>>> fair enough :-)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>>>                    javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>>>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>>                    javax.naming,
>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,  
>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>                    javax.xml.parsers,
>>>>                    org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>>>                    org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>>>                  </Export-Package>
>>>>                  <Import-Package>
>>>>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,  
>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>>                    org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>>                    javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>>>                  </Import-Package>
>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>>>> dependencies
>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
>>>> to be
>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>>>> currently
>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
>>>> can't
>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change
>>>> would
>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>>> environments.  If
>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>>>> from working
>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>>
>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Matthias,
>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>>>> package
>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>>> against, but
>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an
>>>> osgi
>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
>>>> of javaee
>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>>>> should be
>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces
>>>> to be
>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>>> servlet 3.0
>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces  
>>>> against a
>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>>> servlet 2.5
>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
>>>> continue
>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
>>>> patch to
>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>>>> myfaces 2.
>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>>>> many thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ivan,
>>>>
>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>>
>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks !
>>>>
>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>>>> Apache
>>>>
>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>>
>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>>
>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha   
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and  
>>>> [3]
>>>>
>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>
>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>
>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>>
>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>
>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>
>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of  
>>>> three
>>>>
>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>
>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>>> released,
>>>>
>>>>  and why..............
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>>
>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>
>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>>
>>>>  [4]
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Ivan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759

David, thanks for the patch

-Matthias

On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't take
> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the patch.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey David,
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>>> patch.  The
>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
>>> how to
>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>>> repetition, for
>>> which I apologize.
>>
>> :-) No worries
>>
>>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
>>> hard to
>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
>>> I think
>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>>> clearer.
>>
>> +1 on a patch
>>
>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>>
>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you
>>> compile
>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
>>> some
>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
>>> 2.5 type
>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
>>> the
>>> reverse.
>>>
>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>>> patch does
>>> not change any dependencies.
>>
>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>
>>>
>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>>> builds
>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>>> but we had
>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>>
>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current
>>> dependencies.
>>>
>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>
>> I think it is now more clear
>>
>>>
>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>>> geronimo
>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>>> dependencies.
>>>
>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>>
>> Yes, correct
>>
>>>
>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
>>> adding it
>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>>
>>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>>> different
>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>>> builds
>>> against.
>>
>> fair enough :-)
>>
>>>
>>> So, here's the patch:
>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>>                    javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>>                    javax.naming,
>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>                    javax.xml.parsers,
>>>                    org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>>                    org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>>                  </Export-Package>
>>>                  <Import-Package>
>>>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>> 2.0.0)",
>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>>                    org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>                    javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>>                  </Import-Package>
>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>>> dependencies
>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
>>> to be
>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>>> currently
>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
>>> can't
>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change
>>> would
>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>>> environments.  If
>>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>>> from working
>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>
>>
>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>
>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>
>>> Matthias,
>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>>> package
>>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>>> against, but
>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an
>>> osgi
>>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
>>> of javaee
>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>>> should be
>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces
>>> to be
>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>>> servlet 3.0
>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against a
>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>>> servlet 2.5
>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
>>> continue
>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
>>> patch to
>>>  MYFACES-2290 as https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>>> myfaces 2.
>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>>> many thanks
>>> david jencks
>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>
>>> Ivan,
>>>
>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>
>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>
>>> Thanks !
>>>
>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>>> Apache
>>>
>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>
>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>
>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
>>> [1]
>>>
>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>
>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>>
>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>>>
>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>
>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>
>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>
>>> myfaces-api.
>>>
>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>
>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>>
>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>
>>> [ ] +0
>>>
>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>> released,
>>>
>>>  and why..............
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>
>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>
>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>
>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>
>>>  [4]
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>]

Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right that I didn't take
a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.  +1 to the patch.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
wrote:

> Hey David,
>
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
> <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed
>> patch.  The
>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure
>> how to
>> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious
>> repetition, for
>> which I apologize.
>
> :-) No worries
>
>>  If there is some more information I could provide to
>> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really
>> hard to
>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules,
>> I think
>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot
>> clearer.
>
> +1 on a patch
>
>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>
>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you
>> compile
>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into
>> some
>> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet
>> 2.5 type
>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do
>> the
>> reverse.
>>
>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The
>> patch does
>> not change any dependencies.
>
> I think that was misunderstood ?
>
>>
>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,
>> builds
>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well,
>> but we had
>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>
>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current
>> dependencies.
>>
>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>
> I think it is now more clear
>
>>
>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that
>> geronimo
>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided"
>> dependencies.
>>
>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.
>
> Yes, correct
>
>>
>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest
>> adding it
>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>>
>> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
>> different
>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces
>> builds
>> against.
>
> fair enough :-)
>
>>
>> So, here's the patch:
>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>> ===================================================================
>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>                    javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>>                    javax.naming,
>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>> 2.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>                    javax.xml.parsers,
>>                    org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>                    org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>> 2.0.0)",
>> Index: api/pom.xml
>> ===================================================================
>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>                  </Export-Package>
>>                  <Import-Package>
>>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>> 2.0.0)",
>>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>> 2.0.0)",
>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>>                    org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>> 2.0.0)",
>>                    javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>                  </Import-Package>
>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven
>> dependencies
>> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces
>> to be
>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is
>> currently
>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I
>> can't
>> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change
>> would
>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more
>> environments.  If
>> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario
>> from working
>> please explain what it is and how.
>
>
> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
> Let me give your patch a try.
>
> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>
> -Matthias
>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>
>> Matthias,
>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi
>> package
>> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built
>> against, but
>> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an
>> osgi
>> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part
>> of javaee
>> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version
>> should be
>> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces
>> to be
>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a
>> servlet 3.0
>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against a
>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with
>> servlet 2.5
>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can
>> continue
>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable
>> patch to
>>  MYFACES-2290 as https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded
>> myfaces 2.
>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
>> many thanks
>> david jencks
>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to
>> 3.0.0 in
>>
>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>
>> Thanks !
>>
>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>> Apache
>>
>> MyFaces core out.
>>
>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>
>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha
>> [1]
>>
>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>
>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>
>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>>
>> for binary and source packages).
>>
>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>
>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>
>> myfaces-api.
>>
>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>
>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>
>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>
>> [ ] +0
>>
>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>> released,
>>
>>  and why..............
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>
>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>
>>  [4]
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

Hey David,

On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed patch.  The
> comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm not sure how to
> proceed other than through excessive and rather obnoxious repetition, for
> which I apologize.

:-) No worries

> If there is some more information I could provide to
> clear things up please let me know what it is.  I could provide
> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience these are really hard to
> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque formatting rules, I think
> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from the patch is a lot clearer.

+1 on a patch

> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>
> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you compile
> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run into some
> runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a Servlet 2.5 type
> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into problems if you do the
> reverse.
>
> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The patch does
> not change any dependencies.

I think that was misunderstood ?

>
> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance, builds
> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as well, but we had
> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to interfaces and a lot of
> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>
> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current
> dependencies.
>
> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.

I think it is now more clear

>
> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that geronimo
> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be "provided" dependencies.
>
> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.

Yes, correct

>
> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest adding it
> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..
>
> A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need different
> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what myfaces builds
> against.

fair enough :-)

>
> So, here's the patch:
> Index: impl/pom.xml
> ===================================================================
> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>                    javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
>                    javax.naming,
> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2, 2.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>                    javax.xml.parsers,
>                    org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>                    org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0, 2.0.0)",
> Index: api/pom.xml
> ===================================================================
> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>                  </Export-Package>
>                  <Import-Package>
>                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2, 2.0.0)",
>                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2, 2.0.0)",
> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
>                    org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1, 2.0.0)",
>                    javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>                  </Import-Package>
> I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven dependencies
> or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is allow myfaces to be
> used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec jar.  That is currently
> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces 2 integration.  I can't
> imagine any scenario that currently works that this proposed change would
> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be used in more environments.  If
> you think this change will prevent a currently working scenario from working
> please explain what it is and how.


I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package> changes.
Let me give your patch a try.

David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.

-Matthias

> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> Scott
>
> David Jencks wrote:
>
> Matthias,
> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi package
> version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built against, but
> does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in an osgi
> environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not part of javaee
> specs, there seems to be general agreement that the spec version should be
> used as the package version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces to be
> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a servlet 3.0
> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against a
> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with servlet 2.5
> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can continue
> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a suitable patch to
>  MYFACES-2290 as https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded myfaces 2.
>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.
> many thanks
> david jencks
> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
> Ivan,
>
> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to 3.0.0 in
>
> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>
> Thanks !
>
> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>
> +1
>
> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
>
> MyFaces core out.
>
> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>
>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>
>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>
>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>
> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>
> for binary and source packages).
>
> The release notes could be found at [4].
>
> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>
> myfaces-api.
>
> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>
> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>
>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>
> [ ] +0
>
> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>
>  and why..............
>
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks,
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>
>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>
>  [4]
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ivan
>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
>
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>]

I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion about the proposed  
patch.  The comments don't appear to me to relate to the patch.   I'm  
not sure how to proceed other than through excessive and rather  
obnoxious repetition, for which I apologize.  If there is some more  
information I could provide to clear things up please let me know what  
it is.  I could provide before-and-after manifest.mf but in my  
experience these are really hard to see what is going on in due to the  
rather opaque formatting rules, I think the maven-bundle-plugin  
configuration from the patch is a lot clearer.

On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:

> I think I agree with Matthias that this may be problematic.  If you  
> compile something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you very well may run  
> into some runtime issues if you then try to use those binaries in a  
> Servlet 2.5 type environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run into  
> problems if you do the reverse.

True, but irrelevant to the change proposed in the patch.  The patch  
does not change any dependencies.

> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad, for instance,  
> builds against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in Portlet 1.0 as  
> well, but we had to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to  
> interfaces and a lot of reflection to get this to work correctly.
>
> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right now with the current  
> dependencies.

None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.

> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5 does not mean that  
> geronimo can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should both be  
> "provided" dependencies.

The patch does not relate to maven dependencies in any way.

>
> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library, I would suggest  
> adding it as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..  Just my $.02..

A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need  
different osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't care what  
myfaces builds against.

So, here's the patch:

Index: impl/pom.xml
===================================================================
--- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
+++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
@@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
                    javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
                    javax.naming,
-                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,  
2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
-                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,  
2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
-                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
+                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,  
2.1)";resolution:=optional,
+                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,  
2.1)";resolution:=optional,
+                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
+                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
+                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,  
2.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
+                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
                    javax.xml.parsers,
                    org.apache;resolution:=optional,
                    org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,  
2.0.0)",
Index: api/pom.xml
===================================================================
--- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
+++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
@@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
                  </Export-Package>
                  <Import-Package>
                    javax.el;version="[1.0.0, 3.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
+                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
+                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0, 3.1)",
+                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,  
2.0.0)",
                    javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2, 2.0.0)",
-                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)",
+                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0, 3.1)",
                    org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1, 2.0.0)",
                    javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
                  </Import-Package>

I think it's fairly clear that this does not change the maven  
dependencies or what myfaces is building against.  All it does is  
allow myfaces to be used in an osgi environment with a servlet 3 spec  
jar.  That is currently not possible.  This is blocking geronimo- 
myfaces 2 integration.  I can't imagine any scenario that currently  
works that this proposed change would affect, all it does is allow  
myfaces to be used in more environments.  If you think this change  
will prevent a currently working scenario from working please explain  
what it is and how.

thanks
david jencks


>
> Scott
>
> David Jencks wrote:
>>
>> Matthias,
>>
>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi  
>> package version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built  
>> against, but does restrict which package versions myfaces can be  
>> used with in an osgi environment.   While the osgi package version  
>> metadata is not part of javaee specs, there seems to be general  
>> agreement that the spec version should be used as the package  
>> version for api jars.  So, in order for myfaces to be used in a  
>> javee 6 environment, it needs to allow wiring to a servlet 3.0 spec  
>> jar.  That doesn't mean that you need to build myfaces against a  
>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces from working with  
>> servlet 2.5 spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>
>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can  
>> continue with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a  
>> suitable patch to  MYFACES-2290 as https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>
>> With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded  
>> myfaces 2.  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of  
>> the tck.
>>
>> many thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>
>>> Ivan,
>>>
>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to  
>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>> Thanks !
>>>>
>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release  
>>>>>> of Apache
>>>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1- 
>>>>>> alpha  [1]
>>>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha  
>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0- 
>>>>>> alpha  [1]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1]  
>>>>>> and [3]
>>>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of  
>>>>>> three
>>>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be  
>>>>>> released,
>>>>>>  and why..............
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>>>>  [4]
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ivan
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>]

Matthias,

I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.  The osgi package  
version metadata does not specify what jar myfaces is built against,  
but does restrict which package versions myfaces can be used with in  
an osgi environment.   While the osgi package version metadata is not  
part of javaee specs, there seems to be general agreement that the  
spec version should be used as the package version for api jars.  So,  
in order for myfaces to be used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to  
allow wiring to a servlet 3.0 spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you  
need to build myfaces against a servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent  
myfaces from working with servlet 2.5 spec jars in, say, a javaee 5  
environment.

I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk for this so we can  
continue with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've attached a  
suitable patch to  MYFACES-2290 as https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff

With this patch we can at least start a server that has loaded myfaces  
2.  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6 version of the tck.

many thanks
david jencks

On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:

> Ivan,
>
> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to  
>> 3.0.0 in
>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>> Thanks !
>>
>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of  
>>>> Apache
>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1- 
>>>> alpha  [1]
>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha   
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and  
>>>> [3]
>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>
>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>
>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>
>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>
>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of  
>>>> three
>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>> [ ] +0
>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be  
>>>> released,
>>>>  and why..............
>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>>  [4]
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ivan
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

Ivan,

we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final ...
and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...

-Matthias

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to 3.0.0 in
> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
> Thanks !
>
> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>
>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>>
>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>
>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>
>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>> myfaces-api.
>>>
>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>
>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>>>  and why..............
>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>
>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>  [4]
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ivan
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Ivan <xh...@gmail.com>]

Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet spec version to 3.0.0 in
the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
Thanks !

2009/11/26 Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>

> +1
>
> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
>> MyFaces core out.
>>
>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>
>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>> for binary and source packages).
>>
>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>
>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>> myfaces-api.
>>
>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>
>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>>  and why..............
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
>>  [4]
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>
>>
>


-- 
Ivan

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>]

+1

Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
> MyFaces core out.
> 
> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>   1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>   2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>   3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
> 
> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
> for binary and source packages).
> 
> The release notes could be found at [4].
> 
> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with myfaces-api.
> 
> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
> 
> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>  +1 votes (see [3]).
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>   and why..............
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> Thanks,
> Leonardo Uribe
> 
> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>  [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
> 

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>]

+1

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Michael Concini <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
>
> Bruno Aranda wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> 2009/11/25 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr <jakob.korherr@gmail.com
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of
>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>>>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>>>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
>>>>>> released,
>>>>>>  and why..............
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
>>>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
>>>>>>  [4]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Michael Concini <mc...@gmail.com>]

+1

Bruno Aranda wrote:
> +1
>
> 2009/11/25 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>:
>   
>> +1
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>     
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>>>         
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
>>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>>>>
>>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>>>
>>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>>>
>>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>>>>>  and why..............
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>>>  [4]
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>>>           
>>>>         
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>       
>>     
>
>   

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>]

+1

2009/11/25 Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > +1
>> >
>> > 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
>> >> MyFaces core out.
>> >>
>> >> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>> >>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>> >>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>> >>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>> >>
>> >> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>> >> for binary and source packages).
>> >>
>> >> The release notes could be found at [4].
>> >>
>> >> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>> >> myfaces-api.
>> >>
>> >> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>> >>
>> >> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>> >>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------------------------------
>> >> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>> >> [ ] +0
>> >> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>> >>  and why..............
>> >> ------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Leonardo Uribe
>> >>
>> >> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>> >>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>> >> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>> >>  [4]
>> >>
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>]

+1

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>wrote:

> +1
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
> >> MyFaces core out.
> >>
> >> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
> >>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
> >>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
> >>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
> >>
> >> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
> >> for binary and source packages).
> >>
> >> The release notes could be found at [4].
> >>
> >> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
> >> myfaces-api.
> >>
> >> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
> >>
> >> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
> >>  +1 votes (see [3]).
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------
> >> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> >> [ ] +0
> >> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
> >>  and why..............
> >> ------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Leonardo Uribe
> >>
> >> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
> >>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> >> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
> >>  [4]
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

+1

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
>> MyFaces core out.
>>
>> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>>
>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
>> for binary and source packages).
>>
>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>
>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
>> myfaces-api.
>>
>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>>
>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>>  and why..............
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>  [4]
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha

[Jakob Korherr <ja...@gmail.com>]

+1

2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe <lu...@gmail.com>

> Hi,
>
> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha release of Apache
> MyFaces core out.
>
> Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v4.0.1-alpha  [1]
>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test" v1.0.0-alpha [1]
>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core" v2.0.0-alpha  [1]
>
> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1] and [3]
> for binary and source packages).
>
> The release notes could be found at [4].
>
> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities with
> myfaces-api.
>
> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts and vote!
>
> Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
>  and why..............
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks,
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha>
>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc>
>  [4]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>