You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@deltaspike.apache.org by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com> on 2013/04/11 11:38:20 UTC
Re: Heading towards a 0.4 release
any news about a 0.4 release?
2013/3/27 John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> Let's try to avoid procedural issues in this thread.
>
> I'll update some more of the issues this morning.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:05 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > @ "...everyone is free to just add a feature branch...":
> > imo we should keep [1] for single features. otherwise we end up with 100+
> > branches and we can't drop a single one later on (if it would be
> needed)...
> > however, we also have to think about an approach for v1+
> > -> i would suggest to add >new modules< via (feature-)branches once we
> > agreed to add them to deltaspike (in a [discuss]-thread on the dev-list).
> > once a module is stable enough to get part of the next release, we can
> > merge its branch into the master.
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/deltaspike/suggested-git-workflows.html#contribution-workflow
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/3/27 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> >
> > > yup please later than 0.4.
> > > I'd say we call a feature freeze until we ship 0.4 (hopefully next
> week)
> > > and focus on
> > >
> > > * JSF
> > > * JPA
> > > * Security
> > >
> > > After that we can add new features to the master branch.
> > >
> > > Of course, everyone is free to just add a feature branch for a new
> > feature
> > > which is outside those areas.
> > >
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
> > > > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > Cc:
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:28 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Heading towards a 0.4 release
> > > >
> > > >T he last time I asked about it the responses seemed lukewarm, so I
> > > figured it
> > > > wasn't something people really cared about. We could certainly add it
> > in
> > > > post 0.4 if there really is a desire for it.
> > > > —
> > > > Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 7:23 AM, John D. Ament <
> john.d.ament@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Jason,
> > > >> Does that mean we are no longer bringing XML config to DeltaSpike,
> > even
> > > >> though it was already voted in?
> > > >> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Jason Porter
> > > > <li...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > >>> Wrt xml-config, I'll be working on configuring cdi via osgi
> > > > blueprint,
> > > >>> over in the Aries project. If we want to port over the seam config
> > > > stuff,
> > > >>> we can certainly do that too.
> > > >>> —
> > > >>> Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > @Gerhard: the point about proxy was i thought it was not
> straight
> > > > forward
> > > >>> > since some people will not want to bring any additional lib for
> it
> > > >>> (because
> > > >>> > they use only interfaces and proxy libs can conflcts). Wonder if
> > > > handling
> > > >>> > it with a dep optional couldn't do the trick too.
> > > >>> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > > >>> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > > >>> > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > > >>> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > > >>> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> > > >>> > 2013/3/26 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >> @ romain:
> > > >>> >> imo it doesn't make sense to remove something (and add it
> > > > later on
> > > >>> again),
> > > >>> >> if it's just a matter of few hours (to do it immediately).
> > > >>> >> anybody is welcome to work on DS-333.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> @ DS-288
> > > >>> >> it's almost done and as i mentioned earlier i'll
> > > > finish it once DS-289
> > > >>> is
> > > >>> >> done.
> > > >>> >> (yes we need it for 0.4)
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> @ xml-config
> > > >>> >> afair we had an agreement already, but nobody worked on it.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> regards,
> > > >>> >> gerhard
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> 2013/3/26 John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> > I think leaving proxy support to full interface only for
> > > > now makes
> > > >>> sense,
> > > >>> >> > we can enrich this further in another release. How about
> > > > we close 113
> > > >>> >> as a
> > > >>> >> > reduced scope and open a new issue for remaining items?
> > > > I see you
> > > >>> >> already
> > > >>> >> > did some Gerhard, but we still have abstract classes as a
> > > > case as
> > > >>> well.
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Gerhard, can you also comment on 288? Do we need this in
> > > > 0.4 or can it
> > > >>> >> > wait?
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Romain, I didn't quite get you. Are you saying
> > > > you're on hold on this
> > > >>> >> one
> > > >>> >> > (dependent on something?).
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Does anyone believe we need Seam XML Config in 0.4?
> > > > (DS-269 to 272).
> > > >>> I'd
> > > >>> >> > prefer to move it.
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > For DS-105, it looks like consensus is to keep it since
> > > > it's needed
> > > >>> for
> > > >>> >> > older Weld versions. If so can we close as will not fix?
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Jason P - Can you look at DS-132/134? Do we need these?
> > > > There are
> > > >>> other
> > > >>> >> > catch like issues out there. Are they needed?
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Mark S - You have 12 issues assigned to you :/
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > BTW I created a new filter - only open issues [1]
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > John
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > [1]
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12323789
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> >> > <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > Hi
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > DS-60: we are a bunch o wait after it
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > DS-113: think we can push partial bean to another
> > > > release and keep
> > > >>> >> > > interface handling for this iteration (well if you
> > > > import asm part
> > > >>> >> right
> > > >>> >> > > now it can work but then the question will be which
> > > > shade version? a
> > > >>> >> > proxy
> > > >>> >> > > as in cxf?....)
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > other are not blocker IMO
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > > >>> >> > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > > >>> >> > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> > > >>> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > > >>> >> > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > > >>> >> > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > 2013/3/25 Gerhard Petracek
> > > > <ge...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > > hi john,
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > @ examples:
> > > >>> >> > > > we haven't discussed what our goal is here
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-60
> > > >>> >> > > > imo we should do it for 0.5 (and release 0.5
> > > >> short< after 0.4)
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-113
> > > >>> >> > > > we have to change the proxy-lib and move it to
> > > > an own module
> > > >>> >> > > > (i'll create the module today)
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-263
> > > >>> >> > > > not needed, but nice to have -> +1
> > > >>> >> > > > (you can have a look at the setup we used in
> > > > codi for it to know
> > > >>> what
> > > >>> >> > you
> > > >>> >> > > > need)
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-278
> > > >>> >> > > > i re-opened it because we should find a better
> > > > approach imo.
> > > >>> >> > > > however, it isn't a real blocker
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > regards,
> > > >>> >> > > > gerhard
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > 2013/3/25 John D. Ament
> > > > <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > All,
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > Based on the flurry of threads, I wanted
> > > > to help get things
> > > >>> started
> > > >>> >> > to
> > > >>> >> > > > move
> > > >>> >> > > > > towards a 0.4 release. I created the
> > > > filter at [1] to show our
> > > >>> >> > current
> > > >>> >> > > > > progress.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > We currently have 50 issues fixed in 0.4,
> > > > with 27 unresolved for
> > > >>> >> the
> > > >>> >> > > > > release. Some of these issues stick out,
> > > > with me thinking that
> > > >>> >> we've
> > > >>> >> > > > > actually completed them but perhaps need
> > > > some finalization
> > > >>> (note:
> > > >>> >> > I'll
> > > >>> >> > > > use
> > > >>> >> > > > > the abbreviation DS for the DELTASPIKE key
> > > > in JIRA which is
> > > >>> TL;DR)
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-306 - I see examples. Do we need more?
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-60 - I believe we have started
> > > > integrating CDI Query. Should
> > > >>> >> this
> > > >>> >> > > > have
> > > >>> >> > > > > spawned child tasks?
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-113 - Gerhard took the reigns on this
> > > > one and apparently it
> > > >>> >> works
> > > >>> >> > > just
> > > >>> >> > > > > like the Seam3 version. Can this be
> > > > closed?
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > Some low hanging fruit:
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-263 - I was actually looking for
> > > > something like this as well.
> > > >>> >> > I've
> > > >>> >> > > > been
> > > >>> >> > > > > playing with JBoss modules a lot and think
> > > > having a binary
> > > >>> release
> > > >>> >> > > would
> > > >>> >> > > > > help add DS as a JBoss Module. If this
> > > > isn't complete, do we
> > > >>> need
> > > >>> >> it
> > > >>> >> > > in
> > > >>> >> > > > > 0.4?
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-278 - If not done, seems easy enough to
> > > > add.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-288 - Seems like another needed
> > > > feature, but wasn't too
> > > >>> >> difficult
> > > >>> >> > in
> > > >>> >> > > > > either CODI or Seam3.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > DS-289 - Ironically, this one isn't
> > > > even scheduled for 0.4 but
> > > >>> is a
> > > >>> >> > > > blocker
> > > >>> >> > > > > for the release. I'll update it as
> > > > such.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > If you have something in the list below
> > > > that shouldn't be (e.g.
> > > >>> >> it's
> > > >>> >> > > not
> > > >>> >> > > > > needed for 0.4) we should get it
> > > > rescheduled. Since previously
> > > >>> >> only
> > > >>> >> > > 289
> > > >>> >> > > > > was declared needed for 0.4 we should be
> > > > looking at everything
> > > >>> >> else.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > John
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > [1]:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12323788
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Heading towards a 0.4 release
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
hi thomas,
as you might have seen i committed a lot, but there are still some open
topics.
blocking issues are e.g. [1] and the missing window-handling.
regards,
gerhard
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-339
2013/4/11 Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>
> any news about a 0.4 release?
>
>
> 2013/3/27 John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
>
> > Let's try to avoid procedural issues in this thread.
> >
> > I'll update some more of the issues this morning.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:05 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > @ "...everyone is free to just add a feature branch...":
> > > imo we should keep [1] for single features. otherwise we end up with
> 100+
> > > branches and we can't drop a single one later on (if it would be
> > needed)...
> > > however, we also have to think about an approach for v1+
> > > -> i would suggest to add >new modules< via (feature-)branches once we
> > > agreed to add them to deltaspike (in a [discuss]-thread on the
> dev-list).
> > > once a module is stable enough to get part of the next release, we can
> > > merge its branch into the master.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > gerhard
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/deltaspike/suggested-git-workflows.html#contribution-workflow
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/3/27 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> > >
> > > > yup please later than 0.4.
> > > > I'd say we call a feature freeze until we ship 0.4 (hopefully next
> > week)
> > > > and focus on
> > > >
> > > > * JSF
> > > > * JPA
> > > > * Security
> > > >
> > > > After that we can add new features to the master branch.
> > > >
> > > > Of course, everyone is free to just add a feature branch for a new
> > > feature
> > > > which is outside those areas.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
> > > > > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Cc:
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:28 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Heading towards a 0.4 release
> > > > >
> > > > >T he last time I asked about it the responses seemed lukewarm, so I
> > > > figured it
> > > > > wasn't something people really cared about. We could certainly add
> it
> > > in
> > > > > post 0.4 if there really is a desire for it.
> > > > > —
> > > > > Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 7:23 AM, John D. Ament <
> > john.d.ament@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Jason,
> > > > >> Does that mean we are no longer bringing XML config to
> DeltaSpike,
> > > even
> > > > >> though it was already voted in?
> > > > >> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Jason Porter
> > > > > <li...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > >>> Wrt xml-config, I'll be working on configuring cdi via osgi
> > > > > blueprint,
> > > > >>> over in the Aries project. If we want to port over the seam
> config
> > > > > stuff,
> > > > >>> we can certainly do that too.
> > > > >>> —
> > > > >>> Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> > @Gerhard: the point about proxy was i thought it was not
> > straight
> > > > > forward
> > > > >>> > since some people will not want to bring any additional lib
> for
> > it
> > > > >>> (because
> > > > >>> > they use only interfaces and proxy libs can conflcts). Wonder
> if
> > > > > handling
> > > > >>> > it with a dep optional couldn't do the trick too.
> > > > >>> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > > > >>> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > > > >>> > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> > > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > > > >>> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > > > >>> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> > > > >>> > 2013/3/26 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >> @ romain:
> > > > >>> >> imo it doesn't make sense to remove something (and add it
> > > > > later on
> > > > >>> again),
> > > > >>> >> if it's just a matter of few hours (to do it immediately).
> > > > >>> >> anybody is welcome to work on DS-333.
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> @ DS-288
> > > > >>> >> it's almost done and as i mentioned earlier i'll
> > > > > finish it once DS-289
> > > > >>> is
> > > > >>> >> done.
> > > > >>> >> (yes we need it for 0.4)
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> @ xml-config
> > > > >>> >> afair we had an agreement already, but nobody worked on it.
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> regards,
> > > > >>> >> gerhard
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> 2013/3/26 John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> > I think leaving proxy support to full interface only for
> > > > > now makes
> > > > >>> sense,
> > > > >>> >> > we can enrich this further in another release. How about
> > > > > we close 113
> > > > >>> >> as a
> > > > >>> >> > reduced scope and open a new issue for remaining items?
> > > > > I see you
> > > > >>> >> already
> > > > >>> >> > did some Gerhard, but we still have abstract classes as a
> > > > > case as
> > > > >>> well.
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > Gerhard, can you also comment on 288? Do we need this in
> > > > > 0.4 or can it
> > > > >>> >> > wait?
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > Romain, I didn't quite get you. Are you saying
> > > > > you're on hold on this
> > > > >>> >> one
> > > > >>> >> > (dependent on something?).
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > Does anyone believe we need Seam XML Config in 0.4?
> > > > > (DS-269 to 272).
> > > > >>> I'd
> > > > >>> >> > prefer to move it.
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > For DS-105, it looks like consensus is to keep it since
> > > > > it's needed
> > > > >>> for
> > > > >>> >> > older Weld versions. If so can we close as will not fix?
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > Jason P - Can you look at DS-132/134? Do we need these?
> > > > > There are
> > > > >>> other
> > > > >>> >> > catch like issues out there. Are they needed?
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > Mark S - You have 12 issues assigned to you :/
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > BTW I created a new filter - only open issues [1]
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > John
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > [1]
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12323789
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> >> > <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >> > > Hi
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > > DS-60: we are a bunch o wait after it
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > > DS-113: think we can push partial bean to another
> > > > > release and keep
> > > > >>> >> > > interface handling for this iteration (well if you
> > > > > import asm part
> > > > >>> >> right
> > > > >>> >> > > now it can work but then the question will be which
> > > > > shade version? a
> > > > >>> >> > proxy
> > > > >>> >> > > as in cxf?....)
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > > other are not blocker IMO
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > > > >>> >> > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > > > >>> >> > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> > > > >>> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > > > >>> >> > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > > > >>> >> > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > > 2013/3/25 Gerhard Petracek
> > > > > <ge...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > hi john,
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > @ examples:
> > > > >>> >> > > > we haven't discussed what our goal is here
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-60
> > > > >>> >> > > > imo we should do it for 0.5 (and release 0.5
> > > > >> short< after 0.4)
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-113
> > > > >>> >> > > > we have to change the proxy-lib and move it to
> > > > > an own module
> > > > >>> >> > > > (i'll create the module today)
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-263
> > > > >>> >> > > > not needed, but nice to have -> +1
> > > > >>> >> > > > (you can have a look at the setup we used in
> > > > > codi for it to know
> > > > >>> what
> > > > >>> >> > you
> > > > >>> >> > > > need)
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > @ DS-278
> > > > >>> >> > > > i re-opened it because we should find a better
> > > > > approach imo.
> > > > >>> >> > > > however, it isn't a real blocker
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > regards,
> > > > >>> >> > > > gerhard
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > 2013/3/25 John D. Ament
> > > > > <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > All,
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > Based on the flurry of threads, I wanted
> > > > > to help get things
> > > > >>> started
> > > > >>> >> > to
> > > > >>> >> > > > move
> > > > >>> >> > > > > towards a 0.4 release. I created the
> > > > > filter at [1] to show our
> > > > >>> >> > current
> > > > >>> >> > > > > progress.
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > We currently have 50 issues fixed in 0.4,
> > > > > with 27 unresolved for
> > > > >>> >> the
> > > > >>> >> > > > > release. Some of these issues stick out,
> > > > > with me thinking that
> > > > >>> >> we've
> > > > >>> >> > > > > actually completed them but perhaps need
> > > > > some finalization
> > > > >>> (note:
> > > > >>> >> > I'll
> > > > >>> >> > > > use
> > > > >>> >> > > > > the abbreviation DS for the DELTASPIKE key
> > > > > in JIRA which is
> > > > >>> TL;DR)
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-306 - I see examples. Do we need more?
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-60 - I believe we have started
> > > > > integrating CDI Query. Should
> > > > >>> >> this
> > > > >>> >> > > > have
> > > > >>> >> > > > > spawned child tasks?
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-113 - Gerhard took the reigns on this
> > > > > one and apparently it
> > > > >>> >> works
> > > > >>> >> > > just
> > > > >>> >> > > > > like the Seam3 version. Can this be
> > > > > closed?
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > Some low hanging fruit:
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-263 - I was actually looking for
> > > > > something like this as well.
> > > > >>> >> > I've
> > > > >>> >> > > > been
> > > > >>> >> > > > > playing with JBoss modules a lot and think
> > > > > having a binary
> > > > >>> release
> > > > >>> >> > > would
> > > > >>> >> > > > > help add DS as a JBoss Module. If this
> > > > > isn't complete, do we
> > > > >>> need
> > > > >>> >> it
> > > > >>> >> > > in
> > > > >>> >> > > > > 0.4?
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-278 - If not done, seems easy enough to
> > > > > add.
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-288 - Seems like another needed
> > > > > feature, but wasn't too
> > > > >>> >> difficult
> > > > >>> >> > in
> > > > >>> >> > > > > either CODI or Seam3.
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > DS-289 - Ironically, this one isn't
> > > > > even scheduled for 0.4 but
> > > > >>> is a
> > > > >>> >> > > > blocker
> > > > >>> >> > > > > for the release. I'll update it as
> > > > > such.
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > If you have something in the list below
> > > > > that shouldn't be (e.g.
> > > > >>> >> it's
> > > > >>> >> > > not
> > > > >>> >> > > > > needed for 0.4) we should get it
> > > > > rescheduled. Since previously
> > > > >>> >> only
> > > > >>> >> > > 289
> > > > >>> >> > > > > was declared needed for 0.4 we should be
> > > > > looking at everything
> > > > >>> >> else.
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > John
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > > > [1]:
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12323788
> > > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > > >>> >> > > >
> > > > >>> >> > >
> > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>