You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2014/05/30 15:19:09 UTC
release or not?
Hi guys
we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and you
said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release as
expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you think an
openjpa release is close?
Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release should
be on vote next week (+- few days).
wdyt?
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
Re: release or not?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
exactly! about the build better if it can be java 6 to avoid surprises we
got with java 8 for instance which introduces some backward incompatibility
(a bit hidden but present).
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with ASM 5
> to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development for
> JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's just
> discuss what's the right answer.
>
> Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build
> environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right? Or,
> would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
>
> So, we would end up with...
>
> 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
> environments wishing to use Java 8)
> 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
>
> Is this accurate?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hum, not easy then.
> > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant
> change
> > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor
> changes
> > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit
> > instead.
> >
> > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java
> EE 6
> > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA
> > project.
> >
> > JLouis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> > > mainly
> > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or
> > 3.0,
> > >
> > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java
> 6.
> > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6
> should
> > be
> > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > >
> > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the
> > > main stream for new development.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded
> Java
> > > EE
> > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> > > mainly
> > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0
> or
> > > 3.0,
> > > > dunno.
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean
> have
> > > been
> > > > > released last week).
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the
> > > cycles
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might
> > > need
> > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this
> > regard...
> > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from?
> The
> > > > 2.3.x
> > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then
> you
> > > > >> realize
> > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA
> > 2.1
> > > > and
> > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking
> > > for a
> > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for
> > doing
> > > > the
> > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> > > > developers
> > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped
> off
> > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Kevin
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one
> > and
> > > > you
> > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the
> > > release
> > > > as
> > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do
> you
> > > > >> think an
> > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa
> release
> > > > >> should
> > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Rick has created a JIRA and posted a proposed patch for this flexible ASM
integration: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-2514
I'd like to shift this ASM integration discussion over to that JIRA. If
the direction of that JIRA and the patch is acceptable, then we might be
able to skip this extra "2.4.0" release since ASM 5 could be supported with
both the 2.2.x and 2.3.x service streams. We could put trunk back to
supporting Java 7 for future development.
Kevin
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 2014-06-07 13:25 GMT+02:00 Rick Curtis <cu...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > Main issue is testing.
> > I don't follow what is so hard to test this?
> >
> >
> You'll need to test against several asm versions, cxf needed multiple
> releases to do it and OpenJPA build is already hurtful enough to not make
> it worse IMHO.
>
>
> > > it adds a lot of complexity
> > That isn't true, there is very little complexity involved.
> >
> >
> It is since you need to redefine a part of asm API to be able to support it
> properly. ASM API is not stable between majors and it is easily broken
> (typicaly asm4/5 new boolean interface broke several code).
>
>
> > > without any gain.
> > Doing this would allow us to have a single release that is built with
> java6
> > but supports both 6 and 7.
> >
> >
> I don't get it, asm5 works with all java versions so it is enough.
>
>
> > > but then will be totally broken when we'll rework enhancement to get
> rid
> > of other bytecode libs.
> > I don't for see us getting rid of serp anytime soon... My feeling is that
> > piece of work is going to be very risky.
> >
> >
> >
> Not sure we have the choice. Serp already doesn't support java 8. It
> doesn't shout but bytecode will be broken if you really use advanced/new
> features.
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Main issue is testing. We globally judged it doesnt worth it cause it
> > adds
> > > a lot of complexity without any gain.
> > >
> > > Side note: it works with some effort today but then will be totally
> > broken
> > > when we'll rework enhancement to get rid of other bytecode libs.
> > > Le 6 juin 2014 21:20, "Rick Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Is there a reason why we can't have OpenJPA run against asm 4 OR asm
> > 5? I
> > > > hacked together a patch that adds logic/code so that we will load
> > > asm4/asm5
> > > > depending on what is available in the environment. I think Romain
> tried
> > > to
> > > > do something like this originally, but didn't quite get it working.
> > This
> > > > change requires that we add some additional compile time
> dependencies,
> > > but
> > > > those dependencies aren't shipped and we'll only try to use the
> > > > reflectively.
> > > >
> > > > Take a look at the attached patch to see if this is something that
> > might
> > > > help.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Rick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Sounds good. I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the
> Java
> > 7
> > > >> update, and commit. Still looking for resource to do the full
> release
> > > >> cycle...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi Kevin,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6
> constraint
> > > >> then
> > > >> > branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
> > > >> > Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the
> > > Java 7
> > > >> > > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from
> > > trunk
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and
> then
> > > >> revert
> > > >> > > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Kevin
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > >> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess,
> dunno
> > > >> anyone
> > > >> > > else
> > > >> > > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > JLouis
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-)
> > > That's
> > > >> > what
> > > >> > > > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have
> left
> > > >> > recently
> > > >> > > > and
> > > >> > > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way.
> > So,
> > > >> > that's
> > > >> > > > the
> > > >> > > > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last
> release
> > > we
> > > >> did
> > > >> > > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho
> > > time
> > > >> as
> > > >> > > > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to
> > help
> > > >> out.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Kevin
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > >> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits
> > what
> > > >> we
> > > >> > > need
> > > >> > > > > (in
> > > >> > > > > > TomEE at least)
> > > >> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> kwsutter@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to
> have
> > > >> 2.4.x
> > > >> > > with
> > > >> > > > > ASM
> > > >> > > > > > 5
> > > >> > > > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be
> mainline
> > > >> > > development
> > > >> > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this
> > > point,
> > > >> > > let's
> > > >> > > > > just
> > > >> > > > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to
> > > revert
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > build
> > > >> > > > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs.
> Is
> > > >> that
> > > >> > > > right?
> > > >> > > > > > Or,
> > > >> > > > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > So, we would end up with...
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > > >> > > > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe
> > other
> > > >> > OpenJPA
> > > >> > > > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > > >> > > > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development
> for
> > > JPA
> > > >> > 2.1)
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Is this accurate?
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Kevin
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > >> > > > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is
> quite a
> > > >> > > > significant
> > > >> > > > > > > change
> > > >> > > > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > >> > > > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update
> with
> > > some
> > > >> > > minor
> > > >> > > > > > > changes
> > > >> > > > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment
> the
> > > >> minor
> > > >> > > digit
> > > >> > > > > > > > instead.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in
> order
> > to
> > > >> > remain
> > > >> > > > > Java
> > > >> > > > > > > EE 6
> > > >> > > > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with
> > > >> Apache
> > > >> > > > OpenJPA
> > > >> > > > > > > > project.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > JLouis
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> > > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > > >> >:
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> > > >> > compliant,
> > > >> > > > > which
> > > >> > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > mainly
> > > >> > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA
> > 2.1)
> > > >> for a
> > > >> > > > 2.5.0
> > > >> > > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of
> functionality
> > > as
> > > >> > well
> > > >> > > as
> > > >> > > > > > Java
> > > >> > > > > > > 6.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA
> 2.0
> > > and
> > > >> > > Java 6
> > > >> > > > > > > should
> > > >> > > > > > > > be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and
> > Java
> > > 7.
> > > >> > > This
> > > >> > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > main stream for new development.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis
> MONTEIRO
> > <
> > > >> > > > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we
> > > >> cannot
> > > >> > > > > embedded
> > > >> > > > > > > Java
> > > >> > > > > > > > > EE
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification
> > > tests).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> > > >> compliant,
> > > >> > > > which
> > > >> > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > mainly
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA
> > > 2.1)
> > > >> > for a
> > > >> > > > > 2.5.0
> > > >> > > > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > dunno.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > > > >:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release
> > > >> (OpenWebBeans,
> > > >> > > > XBean
> > > >> > > > > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > > been
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > released last week).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> > > >> > > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > >:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list,
> but
> > I
> > > >> don't
> > > >> > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > cycles
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It
> > > sounds
> > > >> > like
> > > >> > > we
> > > >> > > > > > might
> > > >> > > > > > > > > need
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to
> help
> > > out
> > > >> in
> > > >> > > this
> > > >> > > > > > > > regard...
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for
> a
> > > >> release
> > > >> > > > from?
> > > >> > > > > > > The
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > 2.3.x
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If
> > the
> > > >> > latter,
> > > >> > > > > then
> > > >> > > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> realize
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in
> > > >> > preparation
> > > >> > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > JPA
> > > >> > > > > > > > 2.1
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you?
> > If
> > > >> you
> > > >> > are
> > > >> > > > > > looking
> > > >> > > > > > > > > for a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two
> outstanding
> > > >> Infra
> > > >> > > JIRAs
> > > >> > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > > doing
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've
> > had a
> > > >> few
> > > >> > > > > OpenJPA
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > developers
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on
> > > OpenJPA
> > > >> has
> > > >> > > > > dropped
> > > >> > > > > > > off
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the
> > people
> > > >> > left...
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Kevin
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain
> > > Manni-Bucau <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a
> > release
> > > >> for
> > > >> > > > tomee
> > > >> > > > > > one
> > > >> > > > > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more
> time
> > to
> > > >> > > prepare
> > > >> > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > release
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping
> > > something
> > > >> > > > changed:
> > > >> > > > > do
> > > >> > > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> think an
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in
> june
> > > so
> > > >> > > openjpa
> > > >> > > > > > > release
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> should
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn:
> > http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > --
> > > >> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Rick Curtis*
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Rick Curtis*
> >
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
2014-06-07 13:25 GMT+02:00 Rick Curtis <cu...@gmail.com>:
> > Main issue is testing.
> I don't follow what is so hard to test this?
>
>
You'll need to test against several asm versions, cxf needed multiple
releases to do it and OpenJPA build is already hurtful enough to not make
it worse IMHO.
> > it adds a lot of complexity
> That isn't true, there is very little complexity involved.
>
>
It is since you need to redefine a part of asm API to be able to support it
properly. ASM API is not stable between majors and it is easily broken
(typicaly asm4/5 new boolean interface broke several code).
> > without any gain.
> Doing this would allow us to have a single release that is built with java6
> but supports both 6 and 7.
>
>
I don't get it, asm5 works with all java versions so it is enough.
> > but then will be totally broken when we'll rework enhancement to get rid
> of other bytecode libs.
> I don't for see us getting rid of serp anytime soon... My feeling is that
> piece of work is going to be very risky.
>
>
>
Not sure we have the choice. Serp already doesn't support java 8. It
doesn't shout but bytecode will be broken if you really use advanced/new
features.
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Main issue is testing. We globally judged it doesnt worth it cause it
> adds
> > a lot of complexity without any gain.
> >
> > Side note: it works with some effort today but then will be totally
> broken
> > when we'll rework enhancement to get rid of other bytecode libs.
> > Le 6 juin 2014 21:20, "Rick Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > > Is there a reason why we can't have OpenJPA run against asm 4 OR asm
> 5? I
> > > hacked together a patch that adds logic/code so that we will load
> > asm4/asm5
> > > depending on what is available in the environment. I think Romain tried
> > to
> > > do something like this originally, but didn't quite get it working.
> This
> > > change requires that we add some additional compile time dependencies,
> > but
> > > those dependencies aren't shipped and we'll only try to use the
> > > reflectively.
> > >
> > > Take a look at the attached patch to see if this is something that
> might
> > > help.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Sounds good. I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the Java
> 7
> > >> update, and commit. Still looking for resource to do the full release
> > >> cycle...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Kevin,
> > >> >
> > >> > I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint
> > >> then
> > >> > branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
> > >> > Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >> >
> > >> > > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the
> > Java 7
> > >> > > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from
> > trunk
> > >> > and
> > >> > > then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then
> > >> revert
> > >> > > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Kevin
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > >> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno
> > >> anyone
> > >> > > else
> > >> > > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > JLouis
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-)
> > That's
> > >> > what
> > >> > > > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left
> > >> > recently
> > >> > > > and
> > >> > > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way.
> So,
> > >> > that's
> > >> > > > the
> > >> > > > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release
> > we
> > >> did
> > >> > > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho
> > time
> > >> as
> > >> > > > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to
> help
> > >> out.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Kevin
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > >> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits
> what
> > >> we
> > >> > > need
> > >> > > > > (in
> > >> > > > > > TomEE at least)
> > >> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com
> >:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have
> > >> 2.4.x
> > >> > > with
> > >> > > > > ASM
> > >> > > > > > 5
> > >> > > > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline
> > >> > > development
> > >> > > > > for
> > >> > > > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this
> > point,
> > >> > > let's
> > >> > > > > just
> > >> > > > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to
> > revert
> > >> the
> > >> > > > build
> > >> > > > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is
> > >> that
> > >> > > > right?
> > >> > > > > > Or,
> > >> > > > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > So, we would end up with...
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > >> > > > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe
> other
> > >> > OpenJPA
> > >> > > > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > >> > > > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for
> > JPA
> > >> > 2.1)
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Is this accurate?
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Kevin
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > >> > > > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
> > >> > > > significant
> > >> > > > > > > change
> > >> > > > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > >> > > > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with
> > some
> > >> > > minor
> > >> > > > > > > changes
> > >> > > > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the
> > >> minor
> > >> > > digit
> > >> > > > > > > > instead.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order
> to
> > >> > remain
> > >> > > > > Java
> > >> > > > > > > EE 6
> > >> > > > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with
> > >> Apache
> > >> > > > OpenJPA
> > >> > > > > > > > project.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > JLouis
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > >> >:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> > >> > compliant,
> > >> > > > > which
> > >> > > > > > is
> > >> > > > > > > > > mainly
> > >> > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA
> 2.1)
> > >> for a
> > >> > > > 2.5.0
> > >> > > > > > or
> > >> > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality
> > as
> > >> > well
> > >> > > as
> > >> > > > > > Java
> > >> > > > > > > 6.
> > >> > > > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0
> > and
> > >> > > Java 6
> > >> > > > > > > should
> > >> > > > > > > > be
> > >> > > > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and
> Java
> > 7.
> > >> > > This
> > >> > > > is
> > >> > > > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > > > main stream for new development.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> <
> > >> > > > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we
> > >> cannot
> > >> > > > > embedded
> > >> > > > > > > Java
> > >> > > > > > > > > EE
> > >> > > > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification
> > tests).
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> > >> compliant,
> > >> > > > which
> > >> > > > > > is
> > >> > > > > > > > > mainly
> > >> > > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA
> > 2.1)
> > >> > for a
> > >> > > > > 2.5.0
> > >> > > > > > > or
> > >> > > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > >> > > > > > > > > > dunno.
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > > >:
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release
> > >> (OpenWebBeans,
> > >> > > > XBean
> > >> > > > > > > have
> > >> > > > > > > > > been
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > released last week).
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> > >> > > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >:
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but
> I
> > >> don't
> > >> > > > have
> > >> > > > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > > > cycles
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> to
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It
> > sounds
> > >> > like
> > >> > > we
> > >> > > > > > might
> > >> > > > > > > > > need
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help
> > out
> > >> in
> > >> > > this
> > >> > > > > > > > regard...
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a
> > >> release
> > >> > > > from?
> > >> > > > > > > The
> > >> > > > > > > > > > 2.3.x
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If
> the
> > >> > latter,
> > >> > > > > then
> > >> > > > > > > you
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> realize
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in
> > >> > preparation
> > >> > > > for
> > >> > > > > > JPA
> > >> > > > > > > > 2.1
> > >> > > > > > > > > > and
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you?
> If
> > >> you
> > >> > are
> > >> > > > > > looking
> > >> > > > > > > > > for a
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding
> > >> Infra
> > >> > > JIRAs
> > >> > > > > for
> > >> > > > > > > > doing
> > >> > > > > > > > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've
> had a
> > >> few
> > >> > > > > OpenJPA
> > >> > > > > > > > > > developers
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on
> > OpenJPA
> > >> has
> > >> > > > > dropped
> > >> > > > > > > off
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the
> people
> > >> > left...
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Kevin
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain
> > Manni-Bucau <
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a
> release
> > >> for
> > >> > > > tomee
> > >> > > > > > one
> > >> > > > > > > > and
> > >> > > > > > > > > > you
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time
> to
> > >> > > prepare
> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > > > release
> > >> > > > > > > > > > as
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping
> > something
> > >> > > > changed:
> > >> > > > > do
> > >> > > > > > > you
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> think an
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june
> > so
> > >> > > openjpa
> > >> > > > > > > release
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> should
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn:
> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Rick Curtis*
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Rick Curtis*
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Rick Curtis <cu...@gmail.com>.
> Main issue is testing.
I don't follow what is so hard to test this?
> it adds a lot of complexity
That isn't true, there is very little complexity involved.
> without any gain.
Doing this would allow us to have a single release that is built with java6
but supports both 6 and 7.
> but then will be totally broken when we'll rework enhancement to get rid
of other bytecode libs.
I don't for see us getting rid of serp anytime soon... My feeling is that
piece of work is going to be very risky.
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Main issue is testing. We globally judged it doesnt worth it cause it adds
> a lot of complexity without any gain.
>
> Side note: it works with some effort today but then will be totally broken
> when we'll rework enhancement to get rid of other bytecode libs.
> Le 6 juin 2014 21:20, "Rick Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > Is there a reason why we can't have OpenJPA run against asm 4 OR asm 5? I
> > hacked together a patch that adds logic/code so that we will load
> asm4/asm5
> > depending on what is available in the environment. I think Romain tried
> to
> > do something like this originally, but didn't quite get it working. This
> > change requires that we add some additional compile time dependencies,
> but
> > those dependencies aren't shipped and we'll only try to use the
> > reflectively.
> >
> > Take a look at the attached patch to see if this is something that might
> > help.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds good. I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the Java 7
> >> update, and commit. Still looking for resource to do the full release
> >> cycle...
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Kevin,
> >> >
> >> > I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint
> >> then
> >> > branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
> >> > Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >> >
> >> > > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the
> Java 7
> >> > > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from
> trunk
> >> > and
> >> > > then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then
> >> revert
> >> > > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
> >> > >
> >> > > Kevin
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> >> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno
> >> anyone
> >> > > else
> >> > > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > JLouis
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-)
> That's
> >> > what
> >> > > > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left
> >> > recently
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So,
> >> > that's
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release
> we
> >> did
> >> > > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho
> time
> >> as
> >> > > > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help
> >> out.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Kevin
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> >> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what
> >> we
> >> > > need
> >> > > > > (in
> >> > > > > > TomEE at least)
> >> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have
> >> 2.4.x
> >> > > with
> >> > > > > ASM
> >> > > > > > 5
> >> > > > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline
> >> > > development
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this
> point,
> >> > > let's
> >> > > > > just
> >> > > > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to
> revert
> >> the
> >> > > > build
> >> > > > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is
> >> that
> >> > > > right?
> >> > > > > > Or,
> >> > > > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > So, we would end up with...
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> >> > > > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other
> >> > OpenJPA
> >> > > > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> >> > > > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for
> JPA
> >> > 2.1)
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Is this accurate?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Kevin
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> >> > > > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
> >> > > > significant
> >> > > > > > > change
> >> > > > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> >> > > > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with
> some
> >> > > minor
> >> > > > > > > changes
> >> > > > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the
> >> minor
> >> > > digit
> >> > > > > > > > instead.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to
> >> > remain
> >> > > > > Java
> >> > > > > > > EE 6
> >> > > > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with
> >> Apache
> >> > > > OpenJPA
> >> > > > > > > > project.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > JLouis
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> kwsutter@gmail.com
> >> >:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> >> > compliant,
> >> > > > > which
> >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > mainly
> >> > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1)
> >> for a
> >> > > > 2.5.0
> >> > > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > 3.0,
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality
> as
> >> > well
> >> > > as
> >> > > > > > Java
> >> > > > > > > 6.
> >> > > > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0
> and
> >> > > Java 6
> >> > > > > > > should
> >> > > > > > > > be
> >> > > > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java
> 7.
> >> > > This
> >> > > > is
> >> > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > main stream for new development.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> >> > > > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we
> >> cannot
> >> > > > > embedded
> >> > > > > > > Java
> >> > > > > > > > > EE
> >> > > > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification
> tests).
> >> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> >> compliant,
> >> > > > which
> >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > mainly
> >> > > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA
> 2.1)
> >> > for a
> >> > > > > 2.5.0
> >> > > > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > > 3.0,
> >> > > > > > > > > > dunno.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> >> > > > > > >:
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release
> >> (OpenWebBeans,
> >> > > > XBean
> >> > > > > > > have
> >> > > > > > > > > been
> >> > > > > > > > > > > released last week).
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> >> > > kwsutter@gmail.com
> >> > > > >:
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I
> >> don't
> >> > > > have
> >> > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > cycles
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It
> sounds
> >> > like
> >> > > we
> >> > > > > > might
> >> > > > > > > > > need
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help
> out
> >> in
> >> > > this
> >> > > > > > > > regard...
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a
> >> release
> >> > > > from?
> >> > > > > > > The
> >> > > > > > > > > > 2.3.x
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the
> >> > latter,
> >> > > > > then
> >> > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> realize
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in
> >> > preparation
> >> > > > for
> >> > > > > > JPA
> >> > > > > > > > 2.1
> >> > > > > > > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If
> >> you
> >> > are
> >> > > > > > looking
> >> > > > > > > > > for a
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding
> >> Infra
> >> > > JIRAs
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > > > > doing
> >> > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a
> >> few
> >> > > > > OpenJPA
> >> > > > > > > > > > developers
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on
> OpenJPA
> >> has
> >> > > > > dropped
> >> > > > > > > off
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people
> >> > left...
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> Kevin
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain
> Manni-Bucau <
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release
> >> for
> >> > > > tomee
> >> > > > > > one
> >> > > > > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to
> >> > > prepare
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > release
> >> > > > > > > > > > as
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping
> something
> >> > > > changed:
> >> > > > > do
> >> > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> think an
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june
> so
> >> > > openjpa
> >> > > > > > > release
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> should
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Rick Curtis*
> >
>
--
*Rick Curtis*
Re: release or not?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Main issue is testing. We globally judged it doesnt worth it cause it adds
a lot of complexity without any gain.
Side note: it works with some effort today but then will be totally broken
when we'll rework enhancement to get rid of other bytecode libs.
Le 6 juin 2014 21:20, "Rick Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Is there a reason why we can't have OpenJPA run against asm 4 OR asm 5? I
> hacked together a patch that adds logic/code so that we will load asm4/asm5
> depending on what is available in the environment. I think Romain tried to
> do something like this originally, but didn't quite get it working. This
> change requires that we add some additional compile time dependencies, but
> those dependencies aren't shipped and we'll only try to use the
> reflectively.
>
> Take a look at the attached patch to see if this is something that might
> help.
>
> Thanks,
> Rick
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good. I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the Java 7
>> update, and commit. Still looking for resource to do the full release
>> cycle...
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Kevin,
>> >
>> > I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint
>> then
>> > branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
>> > Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> >
>> > > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the Java 7
>> > > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from trunk
>> > and
>> > > then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then
>> revert
>> > > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
>> > >
>> > > Kevin
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> jeanouii@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno
>> anyone
>> > > else
>> > > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
>> > > >
>> > > > JLouis
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's
>> > what
>> > > > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left
>> > recently
>> > > > and
>> > > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So,
>> > that's
>> > > > the
>> > > > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we
>> did
>> > > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time
>> as
>> > > > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help
>> out.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Kevin
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what
>> we
>> > > need
>> > > > > (in
>> > > > > > TomEE at least)
>> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have
>> 2.4.x
>> > > with
>> > > > > ASM
>> > > > > > 5
>> > > > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline
>> > > development
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point,
>> > > let's
>> > > > > just
>> > > > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert
>> the
>> > > > build
>> > > > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is
>> that
>> > > > right?
>> > > > > > Or,
>> > > > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > So, we would end up with...
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
>> > > > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other
>> > OpenJPA
>> > > > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
>> > > > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA
>> > 2.1)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Is this accurate?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Kevin
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
>> > > > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
>> > > > significant
>> > > > > > > change
>> > > > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
>> > > > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some
>> > > minor
>> > > > > > > changes
>> > > > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the
>> minor
>> > > digit
>> > > > > > > > instead.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to
>> > remain
>> > > > > Java
>> > > > > > > EE 6
>> > > > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with
>> Apache
>> > > > OpenJPA
>> > > > > > > > project.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > JLouis
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com
>> >:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
>> > compliant,
>> > > > > which
>> > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > mainly
>> > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1)
>> for a
>> > > > 2.5.0
>> > > > > > or
>> > > > > > > > 3.0,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as
>> > well
>> > > as
>> > > > > > Java
>> > > > > > > 6.
>> > > > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and
>> > > Java 6
>> > > > > > > should
>> > > > > > > > be
>> > > > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7.
>> > > This
>> > > > is
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > main stream for new development.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> > > > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we
>> cannot
>> > > > > embedded
>> > > > > > > Java
>> > > > > > > > > EE
>> > > > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
>> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
>> compliant,
>> > > > which
>> > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > mainly
>> > > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1)
>> > for a
>> > > > > 2.5.0
>> > > > > > > or
>> > > > > > > > > 3.0,
>> > > > > > > > > > dunno.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
>> > > > > > >:
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
>> > > > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release
>> (OpenWebBeans,
>> > > > XBean
>> > > > > > > have
>> > > > > > > > > been
>> > > > > > > > > > > released last week).
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
>> > > kwsutter@gmail.com
>> > > > >:
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I
>> don't
>> > > > have
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > cycles
>> > > > > > > > > > >> to
>> > > > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds
>> > like
>> > > we
>> > > > > > might
>> > > > > > > > > need
>> > > > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out
>> in
>> > > this
>> > > > > > > > regard...
>> > > > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a
>> release
>> > > > from?
>> > > > > > > The
>> > > > > > > > > > 2.3.x
>> > > > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the
>> > latter,
>> > > > > then
>> > > > > > > you
>> > > > > > > > > > >> realize
>> > > > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in
>> > preparation
>> > > > for
>> > > > > > JPA
>> > > > > > > > 2.1
>> > > > > > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If
>> you
>> > are
>> > > > > > looking
>> > > > > > > > > for a
>> > > > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding
>> Infra
>> > > JIRAs
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > > > doing
>> > > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a
>> few
>> > > > > OpenJPA
>> > > > > > > > > > developers
>> > > > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA
>> has
>> > > > > dropped
>> > > > > > > off
>> > > > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people
>> > left...
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> Kevin
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release
>> for
>> > > > tomee
>> > > > > > one
>> > > > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > > > > you
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to
>> > > prepare
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > release
>> > > > > > > > > > as
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something
>> > > > changed:
>> > > > > do
>> > > > > > > you
>> > > > > > > > > > >> think an
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so
>> > > openjpa
>> > > > > > > release
>> > > > > > > > > > >> should
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Rick Curtis*
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Rick Curtis <cu...@gmail.com>.
Is there a reason why we can't have OpenJPA run against asm 4 OR asm 5? I
hacked together a patch that adds logic/code so that we will load asm4/asm5
depending on what is available in the environment. I think Romain tried to
do something like this originally, but didn't quite get it working. This
change requires that we add some additional compile time dependencies, but
those dependencies aren't shipped and we'll only try to use the
reflectively.
Take a look at the attached patch to see if this is something that might
help.
Thanks,
Rick
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds good. I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the Java 7
> update, and commit. Still looking for resource to do the full release
> cycle...
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Kevin,
> >
> > I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint then
> > branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
> > Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the Java 7
> > > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from trunk
> > and
> > > then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then
> revert
> > > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno
> anyone
> > > else
> > > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> > > >
> > > > JLouis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's
> > what
> > > > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left
> > recently
> > > > and
> > > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So,
> > that's
> > > > the
> > > > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we
> did
> > > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time
> as
> > > > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help
> out.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kevin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we
> > > need
> > > > > (in
> > > > > > TomEE at least)
> > > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x
> > > with
> > > > > ASM
> > > > > > 5
> > > > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline
> > > development
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point,
> > > let's
> > > > > just
> > > > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert
> the
> > > > build
> > > > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that
> > > > right?
> > > > > > Or,
> > > > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So, we would end up with...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > > > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other
> > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > > > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA
> > 2.1)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is this accurate?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kevin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
> > > > significant
> > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some
> > > minor
> > > > > > > changes
> > > > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor
> > > digit
> > > > > > > > instead.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to
> > remain
> > > > > Java
> > > > > > > EE 6
> > > > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache
> > > > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > JLouis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com
> >:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> > compliant,
> > > > > which
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1)
> for a
> > > > 2.5.0
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as
> > well
> > > as
> > > > > > Java
> > > > > > > 6.
> > > > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and
> > > Java 6
> > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7.
> > > This
> > > > is
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > main stream for new development.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot
> > > > > embedded
> > > > > > > Java
> > > > > > > > > EE
> > > > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> compliant,
> > > > which
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1)
> > for a
> > > > > 2.5.0
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > > > > > dunno.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release
> (OpenWebBeans,
> > > > XBean
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > > > > released last week).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> > > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I
> don't
> > > > have
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > cycles
> > > > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds
> > like
> > > we
> > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out
> in
> > > this
> > > > > > > > regard...
> > > > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a
> release
> > > > from?
> > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > > 2.3.x
> > > > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the
> > latter,
> > > > > then
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > >> realize
> > > > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in
> > preparation
> > > > for
> > > > > > JPA
> > > > > > > > 2.1
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you
> > are
> > > > > > looking
> > > > > > > > > for a
> > > > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra
> > > JIRAs
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a
> few
> > > > > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > > > > developers
> > > > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA
> has
> > > > > dropped
> > > > > > > off
> > > > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people
> > left...
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Kevin
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release
> for
> > > > tomee
> > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to
> > > prepare
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something
> > > > changed:
> > > > > do
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > >> think an
> > > > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so
> > > openjpa
> > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
*Rick Curtis*
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
Sounds good. I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the Java 7
update, and commit. Still looking for resource to do the full release
cycle...
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint then
> branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
> Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the Java 7
> > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from trunk
> and
> > then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then revert
> > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno anyone
> > else
> > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> > >
> > > JLouis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > >
> > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's
> what
> > > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left
> recently
> > > and
> > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So,
> that's
> > > the
> > > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we did
> > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as
> > > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
> > > >
> > > > Kevin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we
> > need
> > > > (in
> > > > > TomEE at least)
> > > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x
> > with
> > > > ASM
> > > > > 5
> > > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline
> > development
> > > > for
> > > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point,
> > let's
> > > > just
> > > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the
> > > build
> > > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that
> > > right?
> > > > > Or,
> > > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, we would end up with...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other
> OpenJPA
> > > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA
> 2.1)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is this accurate?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kevin
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
> > > significant
> > > > > > change
> > > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some
> > minor
> > > > > > changes
> > > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor
> > digit
> > > > > > > instead.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to
> remain
> > > > Java
> > > > > > EE 6
> > > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache
> > > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > JLouis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6
> compliant,
> > > > which
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a
> > > 2.5.0
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as
> well
> > as
> > > > > Java
> > > > > > 6.
> > > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and
> > Java 6
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7.
> > This
> > > is
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > main stream for new development.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot
> > > > embedded
> > > > > > Java
> > > > > > > > EE
> > > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant,
> > > which
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1)
> for a
> > > > 2.5.0
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > > > > dunno.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans,
> > > XBean
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > > > released last week).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't
> > > have
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > cycles
> > > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds
> like
> > we
> > > > > might
> > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in
> > this
> > > > > > > regard...
> > > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release
> > > from?
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > 2.3.x
> > > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the
> latter,
> > > > then
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > >> realize
> > > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in
> preparation
> > > for
> > > > > JPA
> > > > > > > 2.1
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you
> are
> > > > > looking
> > > > > > > > for a
> > > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra
> > JIRAs
> > > > for
> > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few
> > > > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > > > developers
> > > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has
> > > > dropped
> > > > > > off
> > > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people
> left...
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Kevin
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for
> > > tomee
> > > > > one
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to
> > prepare
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something
> > > changed:
> > > > do
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > >> think an
> > > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so
> > openjpa
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hi Kevin,
I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint then
branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kw...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the Java 7
> support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from trunk and
> then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then revert
> the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno anyone
> else
> > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> >
> > JLouis
> >
> >
> > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > >
> > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's what
> > > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left recently
> > and
> > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So, that's
> > the
> > > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we did
> > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as
> > > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we
> need
> > > (in
> > > > TomEE at least)
> > > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x
> with
> > > ASM
> > > > 5
> > > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline
> development
> > > for
> > > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point,
> let's
> > > just
> > > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > > > >
> > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the
> > build
> > > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that
> > right?
> > > > Or,
> > > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > > > >
> > > > > So, we would end up with...
> > > > >
> > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
> > > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this accurate?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kevin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
> > significant
> > > > > change
> > > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some
> minor
> > > > > changes
> > > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor
> digit
> > > > > > instead.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain
> > > Java
> > > > > EE 6
> > > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache
> > OpenJPA
> > > > > > project.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JLouis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant,
> > > which
> > > > is
> > > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a
> > 2.5.0
> > > > or
> > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well
> as
> > > > Java
> > > > > 6.
> > > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and
> Java 6
> > > > > should
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7.
> This
> > is
> > > > the
> > > > > > > main stream for new development.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot
> > > embedded
> > > > > Java
> > > > > > > EE
> > > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant,
> > which
> > > > is
> > > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a
> > > 2.5.0
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > > > dunno.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans,
> > XBean
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > > released last week).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <
> kwsutter@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't
> > have
> > > > the
> > > > > > > cycles
> > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like
> we
> > > > might
> > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in
> this
> > > > > > regard...
> > > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release
> > from?
> > > > > The
> > > > > > > > 2.3.x
> > > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter,
> > > then
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > > >> realize
> > > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation
> > for
> > > > JPA
> > > > > > 2.1
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are
> > > > looking
> > > > > > > for a
> > > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra
> JIRAs
> > > for
> > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few
> > > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > > developers
> > > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has
> > > dropped
> > > > > off
> > > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Kevin
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for
> > tomee
> > > > one
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to
> prepare
> > > the
> > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something
> > changed:
> > > do
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > > >> think an
> > > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so
> openjpa
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the Java 7
support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch? Remove it from trunk and
then cut the release/branch? Or, cut the release/branch and then revert
the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again? Any preference?
Kevin
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno anyone else
> in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
>
> JLouis
>
>
> 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> >
> > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's what
> > we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left recently
> and
> > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So, that's
> the
> > biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we did
> > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as
> > well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we need
> > (in
> > > TomEE at least)
> > > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > >
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with
> > ASM
> > > 5
> > > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development
> > for
> > > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's
> > just
> > > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > > >
> > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the
> build
> > > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that
> right?
> > > Or,
> > > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > > >
> > > > So, we would end up with...
> > > >
> > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
> > > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
> > > >
> > > > Is this accurate?
> > > >
> > > > Kevin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a
> significant
> > > > change
> > > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor
> > > > changes
> > > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit
> > > > > instead.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain
> > Java
> > > > EE 6
> > > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache
> OpenJPA
> > > > > project.
> > > > >
> > > > > JLouis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant,
> > which
> > > is
> > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a
> 2.5.0
> > > or
> > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as
> > > Java
> > > > 6.
> > > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6
> > > > should
> > > > > be
> > > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This
> is
> > > the
> > > > > > main stream for new development.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot
> > embedded
> > > > Java
> > > > > > EE
> > > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant,
> which
> > > is
> > > > > > mainly
> > > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a
> > 2.5.0
> > > > or
> > > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > > dunno.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans,
> XBean
> > > > have
> > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > released last week).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com
> >:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't
> have
> > > the
> > > > > > cycles
> > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we
> > > might
> > > > > > need
> > > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this
> > > > > regard...
> > > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release
> from?
> > > > The
> > > > > > > 2.3.x
> > > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter,
> > then
> > > > you
> > > > > > > >> realize
> > > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation
> for
> > > JPA
> > > > > 2.1
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are
> > > looking
> > > > > > for a
> > > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs
> > for
> > > > > doing
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few
> > OpenJPA
> > > > > > > developers
> > > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has
> > dropped
> > > > off
> > > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Kevin
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for
> tomee
> > > one
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare
> > the
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something
> changed:
> > do
> > > > you
> > > > > > > >> think an
> > > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa
> > > > release
> > > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno anyone else
in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
JLouis
2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > Let's us know if and how we can help.
>
> Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's what
> we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left recently and
> we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So, that's the
> biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we did
> (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as
> well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we need
> (in
> > TomEE at least)
> > Let's us know if and how we can help.
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with
> ASM
> > 5
> > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development
> for
> > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's
> just
> > > discuss what's the right answer.
> > >
> > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build
> > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right?
> > Or,
> > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> > >
> > > So, we would end up with...
> > >
> > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
> > > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
> > >
> > > Is this accurate?
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant
> > > change
> > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor
> > > changes
> > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit
> > > > instead.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain
> Java
> > > EE 6
> > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA
> > > > project.
> > > >
> > > > JLouis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant,
> which
> > is
> > > > > mainly
> > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0
> > or
> > > > 3.0,
> > > > >
> > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as
> > Java
> > > 6.
> > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6
> > > should
> > > > be
> > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > > >
> > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is
> > the
> > > > > main stream for new development.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot
> embedded
> > > Java
> > > > > EE
> > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which
> > is
> > > > > mainly
> > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a
> 2.5.0
> > > or
> > > > > 3.0,
> > > > > > dunno.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean
> > > have
> > > > > been
> > > > > > > released last week).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have
> > the
> > > > > cycles
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we
> > might
> > > > > need
> > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this
> > > > regard...
> > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from?
> > > The
> > > > > > 2.3.x
> > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter,
> then
> > > you
> > > > > > >> realize
> > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for
> > JPA
> > > > 2.1
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are
> > looking
> > > > > for a
> > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs
> for
> > > > doing
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few
> OpenJPA
> > > > > > developers
> > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has
> dropped
> > > off
> > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Kevin
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee
> > one
> > > > and
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare
> the
> > > > > release
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed:
> do
> > > you
> > > > > > >> think an
> > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa
> > > release
> > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
--
Jean-Louis
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
> Let's us know if and how we can help.
Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's what
we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left recently and
we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So, that's the
biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we did
(2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as
well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
Kevin
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we need (in
> TomEE at least)
> Let's us know if and how we can help.
>
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with ASM
> 5
> > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development for
> > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's just
> > discuss what's the right answer.
> >
> > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build
> > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right?
> Or,
> > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
> >
> > So, we would end up with...
> >
> > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
> > environments wishing to use Java 8)
> > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
> >
> > Is this accurate?
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hum, not easy then.
> > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant
> > change
> > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor
> > changes
> > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit
> > > instead.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java
> > EE 6
> > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA
> > > project.
> > >
> > > JLouis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which
> is
> > > > mainly
> > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0
> or
> > > 3.0,
> > > >
> > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as
> Java
> > 6.
> > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6
> > should
> > > be
> > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > > >
> > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is
> the
> > > > main stream for new development.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded
> > Java
> > > > EE
> > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which
> is
> > > > mainly
> > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0
> > or
> > > > 3.0,
> > > > > dunno.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii@gmail.com
> >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean
> > have
> > > > been
> > > > > > released last week).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have
> the
> > > > cycles
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we
> might
> > > > need
> > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this
> > > regard...
> > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from?
> > The
> > > > > 2.3.x
> > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then
> > you
> > > > > >> realize
> > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for
> JPA
> > > 2.1
> > > > > and
> > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are
> looking
> > > > for a
> > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for
> > > doing
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> > > > > developers
> > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped
> > off
> > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Kevin
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee
> one
> > > and
> > > > > you
> > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the
> > > > release
> > > > > as
> > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do
> > you
> > > > > >> think an
> > > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa
> > release
> > > > > >> should
> > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we need (in
TomEE at least)
Let's us know if and how we can help.
Jean-Louis
2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with ASM 5
> to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development for
> JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's just
> discuss what's the right answer.
>
> Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build
> environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right? Or,
> would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
>
> So, we would end up with...
>
> 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
> 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
> environments wishing to use Java 8)
> 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
>
> Is this accurate?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hum, not easy then.
> > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant
> change
> > to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor
> changes
> > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit
> > instead.
> >
> > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java
> EE 6
> > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA
> > project.
> >
> > JLouis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> > > mainly
> > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or
> > 3.0,
> > >
> > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java
> 6.
> > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6
> should
> > be
> > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> > >
> > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the
> > > main stream for new development.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded
> Java
> > > EE
> > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> > > mainly
> > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0
> or
> > > 3.0,
> > > > dunno.
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean
> have
> > > been
> > > > > released last week).
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Romain,
> > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the
> > > cycles
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might
> > > need
> > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this
> > regard...
> > > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from?
> The
> > > > 2.3.x
> > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then
> you
> > > > >> realize
> > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA
> > 2.1
> > > > and
> > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking
> > > for a
> > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for
> > doing
> > > > the
> > > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> > > > developers
> > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped
> off
> > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Kevin
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Hi guys
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one
> > and
> > > > you
> > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the
> > > release
> > > > as
> > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do
> you
> > > > >> think an
> > > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa
> release
> > > > >> should
> > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > wdyt?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
--
Jean-Louis
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with ASM 5
to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development for
JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's just
discuss what's the right answer.
Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build
environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right? Or,
would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay?
So, we would end up with...
2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage)
2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA
environments wishing to use Java 8)
2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1)
Is this accurate?
Kevin
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hum, not easy then.
> Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant change
> to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
> From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor changes
> as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit
> instead.
>
> Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java EE 6
> compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA
> project.
>
> JLouis
>
>
> 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> > mainly
> > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or
> 3.0,
> >
> > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java 6.
> > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6 should
> be
> > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
> >
> > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the
> > main stream for new development.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded Java
> > EE
> > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> > mainly
> > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or
> > 3.0,
> > > dunno.
> > >
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have
> > been
> > > > released last week).
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Romain,
> > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the
> > cycles
> > > >> to
> > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might
> > need
> > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this
> regard...
> > > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > > >>
> > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The
> > > 2.3.x
> > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
> > > >> realize
> > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA
> 2.1
> > > and
> > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking
> > for a
> > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for
> doing
> > > the
> > > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > > >>
> > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> > > developers
> > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > > >>
> > > >> Kevin
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi guys
> > > >> >
> > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one
> and
> > > you
> > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the
> > release
> > > as
> > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
> > > >> think an
> > > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
> > > >> should
> > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > > >> >
> > > >> > wdyt?
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
Hum, not easy then.
Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant change
to just change the latest digit, isn't it?
>From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor changes
as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit instead.
Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java EE 6
compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA
project.
JLouis
2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> mainly
> a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or 3.0,
>
> The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java 6.
> Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6 should be
> targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
>
> The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the
> main stream for new development.
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded Java
> EE
> > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> mainly
> > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or
> 3.0,
> > dunno.
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have
> been
> > > released last week).
> > >
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > Hi Romain,
> > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the
> cycles
> > >> to
> > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might
> need
> > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
> > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > >>
> > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The
> > 2.3.x
> > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
> > >> realize
> > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1
> > and
> > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking
> for a
> > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing
> > the
> > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > >>
> > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> > developers
> > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > >>
> > >> Kevin
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi guys
> > >> >
> > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and
> > you
> > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the
> release
> > as
> > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
> > >> think an
> > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > >> >
> > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
> > >> should
> > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > >> >
> > >> > wdyt?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
--
Jean-Louis
Re: release or not?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
basically we need asm5 so if it was not backported we need 2.4.0 we doesnt
have yet any java 7 dependency or 2.1 feature so I guess that's just a
choice question, no? Well in all case tomee needs openjpa with asm 5
support :).
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> mainly
> a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or 3.0,
>
> The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java 6.
> Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6 should be
> targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
>
> The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the
> main stream for new development.
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded Java
> EE
> > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
> mainly
> > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or
> 3.0,
> > dunno.
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have
> been
> > > released last week).
> > >
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > Hi Romain,
> > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the
> cycles
> > >> to
> > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might
> need
> > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
> > >> Hint, hint... :-)
> > >>
> > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The
> > 2.3.x
> > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
> > >> realize
> > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1
> > and
> > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking
> for a
> > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing
> > the
> > >> nightly code and doc builds...
> > >>
> > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> > developers
> > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> > >>
> > >> Kevin
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi guys
> > >> >
> > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and
> > you
> > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the
> release
> > as
> > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
> > >> think an
> > >> > openjpa release is close?
> > >> >
> > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
> > >> should
> > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > >> >
> > >> > wdyt?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
> Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is
mainly
a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or 3.0,
The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java 6.
Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6 should be
targetted for this 2.3.x service stream.
The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the
main stream for new development.
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded Java EE
> 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is mainly
> a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or 3.0,
> dunno.
>
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
>
> > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have been
> > released last week).
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi Romain,
> >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the cycles
> >> to
> >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might need
> >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
> >> Hint, hint... :-)
> >>
> >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The
> 2.3.x
> >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
> >> realize
> >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1
> and
> >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking for a
> >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing
> the
> >> nightly code and doc builds...
> >>
> >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> developers
> >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> >>
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi guys
> >> >
> >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and
> you
> >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release
> as
> >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
> >> think an
> >> > openjpa release is close?
> >> >
> >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
> >> should
> >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> >> >
> >> > wdyt?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Side note 2: s/7/6/ in poms make openjpa 2.4.0 working with java 6
constraint ATM :)
Well if nobody has enough time+karma for it we'll use our fork but this is
really what we all want to avoid :(
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-05-30 17:30 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded Java EE
> 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
> Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is mainly
> a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or 3.0,
> dunno.
>
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
>
> > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have been
> > released last week).
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi Romain,
> >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the cycles
> >> to
> >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might need
> >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
> >> Hint, hint... :-)
> >>
> >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The
> 2.3.x
> >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
> >> realize
> >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1
> and
> >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking for a
> >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing
> the
> >> nightly code and doc builds...
> >>
> >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> developers
> >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> >>
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi guys
> >> >
> >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and
> you
> >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release
> as
> >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
> >> think an
> >> > openjpa release is close?
> >> >
> >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
> >> should
> >> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> >> >
> >> > wdyt?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded Java EE
7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests).
Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is mainly
a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or 3.0,
dunno.
Jean-Louis
2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>:
> We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have been
> released last week).
>
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Romain,
>> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the cycles
>> to
>> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might need
>> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
>> Hint, hint... :-)
>>
>> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The 2.3.x
>> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
>> realize
>> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1 and
>> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking for a
>> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing the
>> nightly code and doc builds...
>>
>> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA developers
>> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
>> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi guys
>> >
>> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and you
>> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release as
>> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
>> think an
>> > openjpa release is close?
>> >
>> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
>> should
>> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
>> >
>> > wdyt?
>> >
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
--
Jean-Louis
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
> We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
Note that 2.4.0 is very close to supporting the Java 8 runtime for
applications. I still hit intermittent test failures, so I'm not ready to
sign off on this completely. But, Romain seems confident.
Note that this does not mean that we will be changing the build environment
for OpenJPA to Java 8. This is only to support the Java 8 runtime for
OpenJPA applications.
Kevin
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
> That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have been
> released last week).
>
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi Romain,
> > I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the cycles
> to
> > create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might need
> > more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
> > Hint, hint... :-)
> >
> > Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The 2.3.x
> > service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you
> realize
> > that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1 and
> > the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking for a
> > 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing
> the
> > nightly code and doc builds...
> >
> > Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA
> developers
> > move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> > considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys
> > >
> > > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and you
> > > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release
> as
> > > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you
> think
> > an
> > > openjpa release is close?
> > >
> > > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release
> should
> > > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> > >
> > > wdyt?
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>
Re: release or not?
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8.
That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean have been
released last week).
Jean-Louis
2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Romain,
> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the cycles to
> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might need
> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
> Hint, hint... :-)
>
> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The 2.3.x
> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you realize
> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1 and
> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking for a
> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing the
> nightly code and doc builds...
>
> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA developers
> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
> considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys
> >
> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and you
> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release as
> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you think
> an
> > openjpa release is close?
> >
> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release should
> > be on vote next week (+- few days).
> >
> > wdyt?
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
>
--
Jean-Louis
Re: release or not?
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
Hi Romain,
I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the cycles to
create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might need
more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this regard...
Hint, hint... :-)
Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? The 2.3.x
service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then you realize
that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA 2.1 and
the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking for a
2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for doing the
nightly code and doc builds...
Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA developers
move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped off
considerably... Just too much work for the people left...
Kevin
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi guys
>
> we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one and you
> said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the release as
> expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do you think an
> openjpa release is close?
>
> Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa release should
> be on vote next week (+- few days).
>
> wdyt?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>