You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> on 2010/11/09 11:52:41 UTC
2.x Beta2?
I just closed down the 2.x Beta1 thread. Getting to Beta1 was somewhat
drawn out and it feels like we still have much to do before 2.0
proper. We all spotted lots of things that need further attention post
Beta1 so how about we move straight on an start building toward a
Beta2 while we have some momentum. I'll go ahead and create a category
to collect JIRA. and try and get the things that I spotted registered
there.
Regards
Simon.
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:00 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Mike Edwards
> <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 09/12/2010 13:27, ant elder wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
>>> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
>>> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
>>> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
>>> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
>>> that week would that work?
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> One thing I'd be keen on seeing for this release is a cleanup of
>> dependencies.
>>
>> There are a number of cases where we have dependencies on modules where that
>> function is actually now in the base JDK 1.6 - and there are some problems
>> occurring with clashes between code in the JDK and these other modules.
>>
>> Two examples are:
>>
>> com.sun.xml.jaxb-impl
>>
>> javax.xml.ws.jaxws-api
>>
>>
>> --- these are stated as dependencies in a number of modules but all the
>> classes are also there in the base JDK 1.6. The dependencies should be
>> removed in my opinion, and the base JDK code should be used in all cases.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yours, Mike.
>>
>>
>
> It would be good to clean up the dependencies, i'll have a go at doing
> some but its quite a big job to get all done quickly without others
> helping.
>
> ...ant
>
It turns out this isn't as simple as it sounds and causes a bunch of
issues. I think all of them can be solved by including the explicit
dependencies with test scope at various places but for some the Tuscan
code should really be fixed where its doing things not quite right,
others may be due to bugs or limitations in the Java versions of the
impls. I've raised TUSCANY-3810 to track it. Its quite slow going as
to find issues you need run a full build after removing each
dependency to find where else its used or required. I've updates for
some things but i'll wait till the weekend to do some commits as i
expect there might be some breakages till it all comes together.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Mike Edwards
<mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/12/2010 13:27, ant elder wrote:
>>
>> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
>> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
>> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
>> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
>> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
>> that week would that work?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
> Folks,
>
> One thing I'd be keen on seeing for this release is a cleanup of
> dependencies.
>
> There are a number of cases where we have dependencies on modules where that
> function is actually now in the base JDK 1.6 - and there are some problems
> occurring with clashes between code in the JDK and these other modules.
>
> Two examples are:
>
> com.sun.xml.jaxb-impl
>
> javax.xml.ws.jaxws-api
>
>
> --- these are stated as dependencies in a number of modules but all the
> classes are also there in the base JDK 1.6. The dependencies should be
> removed in my opinion, and the base JDK code should be used in all cases.
>
>
>
> Yours, Mike.
>
>
It would be good to clean up the dependencies, i'll have a go at doing
some but its quite a big job to get all done quickly without others
helping.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Mike Edwards <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 09/12/2010 13:27, ant elder wrote:
> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
> that week would that work?
>
> ...ant
>
Folks,
One thing I'd be keen on seeing for this release is a cleanup of dependencies.
There are a number of cases where we have dependencies on modules where that function is actually
now in the base JDK 1.6 - and there are some problems occurring with clashes between code in the JDK
and these other modules.
Two examples are:
com.sun.xml.jaxb-impl
javax.xml.ws.jaxws-api
--- these are stated as dependencies in a number of modules but all the classes are also there in
the base JDK 1.6. The dependencies should be removed in my opinion, and the base JDK code should be
used in all cases.
Yours, Mike.
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
The trunk build was passing cleanly this weekend so i took the
opportunity to take tag and spin the beta 2 release artifacts. I'll
send a vote email now.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Upgrade to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom 1.2.10, Abdera 1.1.1 and Jackson 1.6.2
Improve jaxb/json databindings and jsonrpc binding to better handle interfaces
Update to latest OASIS XSDs
Thans,
Raymond
________________________________________________________________
Raymond Feng
rfeng@apache.org
Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
________________________________________________________________
On Jan 12, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 2:10 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Luciano, Raymond - do you have anything you want mentioned?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
> Let me review the committs since last release and update CHANGES
> accordingly (tonight).
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Luciano Resende <lr...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 2:10 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks!
>
> Luciano, Raymond - do you have anything you want mentioned?
>
> ...ant
>
Let me review the committs since last release and update CHANGES
accordingly (tonight).
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:52 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ping. Has anyone else made any changes of significance since beta1?
>>>>
>>>> ...ant
>>>>
>>>
>>> There have been quite a few changes in the async area that we should
>>> pick up for Beta 2 if we can. Also there's been some ML debate about
>>> databinding function. No changes in this area yet though as far as I
>>> know.
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>
>> Ok!
>>
>> The CHANGES file is here:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/CHANGES
>>
>> Would a bullet point saying "- quite a few changes in the async area"
>> capture it or is there a better description?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
> I (or maybe Mike) will add a like or two when we're done in the next day or so.
>
> Simon
>
Thanks!
Luciano, Raymond - do you have anything you want mentioned?
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:52 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ping. Has anyone else made any changes of significance since beta1?
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>
>> There have been quite a few changes in the async area that we should
>> pick up for Beta 2 if we can. Also there's been some ML debate about
>> databinding function. No changes in this area yet though as far as I
>> know.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>
> Ok!
>
> The CHANGES file is here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/CHANGES
>
> Would a bullet point saying "- quite a few changes in the async area"
> capture it or is there a better description?
>
> ...ant
>
I (or maybe Mike) will add a like or two when we're done in the next day or so.
Simon
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ping. Has anyone else made any changes of significance since beta1?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
> There have been quite a few changes in the async area that we should
> pick up for Beta 2 if we can. Also there's been some ML debate about
> databinding function. No changes in this area yet though as far as I
> know.
>
> Simon
>
Ok!
The CHANGES file is here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/CHANGES
Would a bullet point saying "- quite a few changes in the async area"
capture it or is there a better description?
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
>
> Ping. Has anyone else made any changes of significance since beta1?
>
> ...ant
>
There have been quite a few changes in the async area that we should
pick up for Beta 2 if we can. Also there's been some ML debate about
databinding function. No changes in this area yet though as far as I
know.
Simon
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 8:43 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 8:55 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:27 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
>>> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
>>> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
>>> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
>>> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
>>> that week would that work?
>>>
>>
>> Not much progress on this yet. The build has been broken so i've held
>> off taking the release branch and i'm about to go on a Christmas
>> break. I might have some time around the 27/28th if no one else gets
>> to it before then.
>>
>
> Still slowly working on this.
>
> One thing that would help would be if everyone could update the
> CHANGES file with anything they've done worth mentioning there.
>
Ping. Has anyone else made any changes of significance since beta1?
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 8:55 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:27 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
>> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
>> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
>> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
>> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
>> that week would that work?
>>
>
> Not much progress on this yet. The build has been broken so i've held
> off taking the release branch and i'm about to go on a Christmas
> break. I might have some time around the 27/28th if no one else gets
> to it before then.
>
Still slowly working on this.
One thing that would help would be if everyone could update the
CHANGES file with anything they've done worth mentioning there.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:27 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
> that week would that work?
>
Not much progress on this yet. The build has been broken so i've held
off taking the release branch and i'm about to go on a Christmas
break. I might have some time around the 27/28th if no one else gets
to it before then.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com>.
I've just finished correcting the pom inconsistencies. The conclusion of
this work is that ALL samples had wrong parent poms specified... Modules
were correctly specified so when building from a top-level folder (i.e.
samples/) there was no problem. However, when trying to build a single
sample with a local maven repo that didn't have the required poms (i.e.
apache-7.pom), the paths and artifactIds to the parent poms were incorrect
causing MissingArtifactException.
I've seen in various places tweaks like
<relativePath>../../pom.xml</relativePath> even tough it had a direct parent
only one level up. I think these point out that the fine granularity of the
poms makes it too hard for us to maintain. If we run into the same problem
in the future I suggest we reconsider and move to either a single pom in
samples/ or poms in each direct child of samples (getting-started,
learning-more, ...) and samples.
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:03 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 5:22 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> A regular hudson build of the samples with an empty repo sounds
> >> useful, though i worry it might take quite a long time to run. I'll
> >> set up a test one to see how long it does take.
> >>
> >
> > I agree, it mustn't be the Hudson build, but any mechanism that prevents
> > from getting tricked by the local repo containing the artifacts already.
> I'm
> > thinking we can setup this kind of build and run it just before doing a
> > release, it's not necessary on a daily basis.
> >
> >>
> >> I have just tried building all the samples from trunk with an empty
> >> repo and it worked ok, how are you building them, from an svn checkout
> >> or from one of the src/bin distribution snapshots?
> >>
> >
> > svn checkout... take a look at the comet binding sample, it specifies the
> > parent as tuscany-samples with relativePath ../pom.xml. The artifact
> found
> > one directory level upper is tuscany-sample-binding-comet. Similar things
> > happened with the introduction of the learning-more, running-tuscany etc.
> > directories. So, it has to fail.
> > Does it worth having poms in each and every directory? Wouldn't it be
> much
> > easier to maintain a single pom at the samples/ directory level to which
> all
> > the samples point?
> >>
>
> It does sound simpler to have the single parent. I vaguely remember we
> talked about doing that before when talking about the samples, guess
> we just haven't gotten to it yet.
>
> ...ant
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 5:22 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> A regular hudson build of the samples with an empty repo sounds
>> useful, though i worry it might take quite a long time to run. I'll
>> set up a test one to see how long it does take.
>>
>
> I agree, it mustn't be the Hudson build, but any mechanism that prevents
> from getting tricked by the local repo containing the artifacts already. I'm
> thinking we can setup this kind of build and run it just before doing a
> release, it's not necessary on a daily basis.
>
>>
>> I have just tried building all the samples from trunk with an empty
>> repo and it worked ok, how are you building them, from an svn checkout
>> or from one of the src/bin distribution snapshots?
>>
>
> svn checkout... take a look at the comet binding sample, it specifies the
> parent as tuscany-samples with relativePath ../pom.xml. The artifact found
> one directory level upper is tuscany-sample-binding-comet. Similar things
> happened with the introduction of the learning-more, running-tuscany etc.
> directories. So, it has to fail.
> Does it worth having poms in each and every directory? Wouldn't it be much
> easier to maintain a single pom at the samples/ directory level to which all
> the samples point?
>>
It does sound simpler to have the single parent. I vaguely remember we
talked about doing that before when talking about the samples, guess
we just haven't gotten to it yet.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 5:22 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> A regular hudson build of the samples with an empty repo sounds
> useful, though i worry it might take quite a long time to run. I'll
> set up a test one to see how long it does take.
>
>
I agree, it mustn't be the Hudson build, but any mechanism that prevents
from getting tricked by the local repo containing the artifacts already. I'm
thinking we can setup this kind of build and run it just before doing a
release, it's not necessary on a daily basis.
> I have just tried building all the samples from trunk with an empty
> repo and it worked ok, how are you building them, from an svn checkout
> or from one of the src/bin distribution snapshots?
>
>
svn checkout... take a look at the comet binding sample, it specifies the
parent as tuscany-samples with relativePath ../pom.xml. The artifact found
one directory level upper is tuscany-sample-binding-comet. Similar things
happened with the introduction of the learning-more, running-tuscany etc.
directories. So, it has to fail.
Does it worth having poms in each and every directory? Wouldn't it be much
easier to maintain a single pom at the samples/ directory level to which all
the samples point?
...ant
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Regarding the samples, I've tried some of them in the past couple of days
> > with an empty local maven repo and there are multiple samples which fail
> to
> > build due to incorrect relativePath to the parent pom. I'll walk through
> all
> > of the samples with an empty maven repo and fix the invalid references
> > hopefully this weekend so that it will be ready early next week.
> > Can Hudson be set to clean it's tuscany artifacts from the local repo
> before
> > performing a build?
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:27 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
> >> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
> >> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
> >> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
> >> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
> >> that week would that work?
> >>
> >> ...ant
> >>
> >> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:30 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > The abdera release vote has passed, i've not finished all the release
> >> > publishing yet but the 1.1.1 artifacts have been copied to the maven
> >> > repository so the axiom updates in Tuscany should be able to happen
> >> > now.
> >> >
> >> > ...ant
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:54 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> OK, well thanks for trying it, i'll get the abdera release done so at
> >> >> least we can do the Axis2 1.5.3 / Axiom 1.2.10 upgrade.
> >> >>
> >> >> ...ant
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>> The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem.
> >> >>> But
> >> >>> apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper
> than
> >> >>> this
> >> >>> one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year.
> >> >>> Our
> >> >>> code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick
> way
> >> >>> to fix
> >> >>> that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with
> >> >>> Apache
> >> >>> Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make
> into
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> Beta 2 release though.
> >> >>> I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can
> upgrade
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Raymond
> >> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >> >>> Raymond Feng
> >> >>> rfeng@apache.org
> >> >>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> >> >>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> >> >>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> >> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >> >>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
> >> >>> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
> >> >>>
> >> >>> ...ant
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3,
> >> >>> Axiom
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1
> >> >>> version
> >> >>>
> >> >>> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we
> >> >>> go.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Raymond
> >> >>>
> >> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Raymond Feng
> >> >>>
> >> >>> rfeng@apache.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> >> >>>
> >> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we
> suggested
> >> >>>
> >> >>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
> >> >>>
> >> >>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> ...ant
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >
> >
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
A regular hudson build of the samples with an empty repo sounds
useful, though i worry it might take quite a long time to run. I'll
set up a test one to see how long it does take.
I have just tried building all the samples from trunk with an empty
repo and it worked ok, how are you building them, from an svn checkout
or from one of the src/bin distribution snapshots?
...ant
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Regarding the samples, I've tried some of them in the past couple of days
> with an empty local maven repo and there are multiple samples which fail to
> build due to incorrect relativePath to the parent pom. I'll walk through all
> of the samples with an empty maven repo and fix the invalid references
> hopefully this weekend so that it will be ready early next week.
> Can Hudson be set to clean it's tuscany artifacts from the local repo before
> performing a build?
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:27 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
>> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
>> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
>> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
>> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
>> that week would that work?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:30 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The abdera release vote has passed, i've not finished all the release
>> > publishing yet but the 1.1.1 artifacts have been copied to the maven
>> > repository so the axiom updates in Tuscany should be able to happen
>> > now.
>> >
>> > ...ant
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:54 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> OK, well thanks for trying it, i'll get the abdera release done so at
>> >> least we can do the Axis2 1.5.3 / Axiom 1.2.10 upgrade.
>> >>
>> >> ...ant
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem.
>> >>> But
>> >>> apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper than
>> >>> this
>> >>> one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year.
>> >>> Our
>> >>> code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick way
>> >>> to fix
>> >>> that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with
>> >>> Apache
>> >>> Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make into
>> >>> the
>> >>> Beta 2 release though.
>> >>> I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can upgrade
>> >>> to
>> >>> Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Raymond
>> >>> ________________________________________________________________
>> >>> Raymond Feng
>> >>> rfeng@apache.org
>> >>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> >>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>> >>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>> >>> ________________________________________________________________
>> >>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
>> >>> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
>> >>>
>> >>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
>> >>>
>> >>> ...ant
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3,
>> >>> Axiom
>> >>>
>> >>> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1
>> >>> version
>> >>>
>> >>> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
>> >>>
>> >>> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we
>> >>> go.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> Raymond
>> >>>
>> >>> ________________________________________________________________
>> >>>
>> >>> Raymond Feng
>> >>>
>> >>> rfeng@apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>> >>>
>> >>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>> >>>
>> >>> ________________________________________________________________
>> >>>
>> >>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>> >>>
>> >>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>> >>>
>> >>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>> >>>
>> >>> ...ant
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com>.
Regarding the samples, I've tried some of them in the past couple of days
with an empty local maven repo and there are multiple samples which fail to
build due to incorrect relativePath to the parent pom. I'll walk through all
of the samples with an empty maven repo and fix the invalid references
hopefully this weekend so that it will be ready early next week.
Can Hudson be set to clean it's tuscany artifacts from the local repo before
performing a build?
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:27 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
> release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
> than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
> year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
> soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
> that week would that work?
>
> ...ant
>
> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:30 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The abdera release vote has passed, i've not finished all the release
> > publishing yet but the 1.1.1 artifacts have been copied to the maven
> > repository so the axiom updates in Tuscany should be able to happen
> > now.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:54 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> OK, well thanks for trying it, i'll get the abdera release done so at
> >> least we can do the Axis2 1.5.3 / Axiom 1.2.10 upgrade.
> >>
> >> ...ant
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem.
> But
> >>> apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper than
> this
> >>> one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year.
> Our
> >>> code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick way
> to fix
> >>> that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with
> Apache
> >>> Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make into
> the
> >>> Beta 2 release though.
> >>> I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can upgrade
> to
> >>> Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Raymond
> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >>> Raymond Feng
> >>> rfeng@apache.org
> >>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> >>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> >>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
> >>> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
> >>>
> >>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
> >>>
> >>> ...ant
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3,
> Axiom
> >>>
> >>> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1
> version
> >>>
> >>> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
> >>>
> >>> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we
> go.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Raymond
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >>>
> >>> Raymond Feng
> >>>
> >>> rfeng@apache.org
> >>>
> >>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> >>>
> >>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> >>>
> >>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________________________________________
> >>>
> >>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
> >>>
> >>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
> >>>
> >>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
> >>>
> >>> ...ant
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
Ok so all those version updates are in now so how are we for doing a
release? Would be nice to do some more samples work but its no worse
than beta1 as it is now. It would be good to get a release out this
year, but with the Christmas break coming up we'd have to do it quite
soon to do that, so if we took a branch early next week to get it done
that week would that work?
...ant
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:30 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The abdera release vote has passed, i've not finished all the release
> publishing yet but the 1.1.1 artifacts have been copied to the maven
> repository so the axiom updates in Tuscany should be able to happen
> now.
>
> ...ant
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:54 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> OK, well thanks for trying it, i'll get the abdera release done so at
>> least we can do the Axis2 1.5.3 / Axiom 1.2.10 upgrade.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem. But
>>> apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper than this
>>> one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year. Our
>>> code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick way to fix
>>> that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with Apache
>>> Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make into the
>>> Beta 2 release though.
>>> I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can upgrade to
>>> Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Raymond
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>> Raymond Feng
>>> rfeng@apache.org
>>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
>>>
>>> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
>>> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
>>>
>>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom
>>>
>>> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version
>>>
>>> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
>>>
>>> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Raymond
>>>
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Raymond Feng
>>>
>>> rfeng@apache.org
>>>
>>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>>>
>>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>>>
>>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>>>
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>>>
>>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>>>
>>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>>>
>>>
>>> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
The abdera release vote has passed, i've not finished all the release
publishing yet but the 1.1.1 artifacts have been copied to the maven
repository so the axiom updates in Tuscany should be able to happen
now.
...ant
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:54 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK, well thanks for trying it, i'll get the abdera release done so at
> least we can do the Axis2 1.5.3 / Axiom 1.2.10 upgrade.
>
> ...ant
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem. But
>> apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper than this
>> one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year. Our
>> code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick way to fix
>> that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with Apache
>> Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make into the
>> Beta 2 release though.
>> I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can upgrade to
>> Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Raymond Feng
>> rfeng@apache.org
>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
>>
>> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
>> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
>>
>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom
>>
>> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version
>>
>> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
>>
>> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Raymond
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>>
>> Raymond Feng
>>
>> rfeng@apache.org
>>
>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>>
>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>>
>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>>
>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>>
>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>>
>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>>
>>
>> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
OK, well thanks for trying it, i'll get the abdera release done so at
least we can do the Axis2 1.5.3 / Axiom 1.2.10 upgrade.
...ant
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem. But
> apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper than this
> one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year. Our
> code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick way to fix
> that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with Apache
> Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make into the
> Beta 2 release though.
> I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can upgrade to
> Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> ________________________________________________________________
> Raymond Feng
> rfeng@apache.org
> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> ________________________________________________________________
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
>
> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
>
> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
>
> ...ant
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom
>
> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version
>
> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
>
> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Raymond
>
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> Raymond Feng
>
> rfeng@apache.org
>
> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>
> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>
> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>
> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>
> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>
>
> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>
> ...ant
>
>
>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>.
The new release of Abdera fixes the Axiom 1.2.10 dependency problem. But apparently the issues for the binding-atom-runtime is much deeper than this one. It seems the test cases have been disabled for almost one year. Our code have changed significantly since then. I didn't find a quick way to fix that. One thing I'm considering is to replace Abdera completely with Apache Wink which has much nicer support for ATOM/RSS. But it won't make into the Beta 2 release though.
I still want to see the release of Abdera 1.1.1 so that we can upgrade to Axis2 1.5.3 and Axiom 1.2.10.
Thanks,
Raymond
________________________________________________________________
Raymond Feng
rfeng@apache.org
Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
________________________________________________________________
On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, ant elder wrote:
> The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
> try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
>
> http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
>
> ...ant
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom
>> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version
>> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
>> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Raymond Feng
>> rfeng@apache.org
>> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
>> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>>
>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>>
>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>>
>>
>> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
The Abdera release artifacts are now available, would you be able to
try them with the local changes you have to verify they work ok?
http://apache.markmail.org/message/766szspj6sxahg3r
...ant
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom
> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version
> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> ________________________________________________________________
> Raymond Feng
> rfeng@apache.org
> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> ________________________________________________________________
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>
> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>
> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>
>
> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>
> ...ant
>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
Ok, it looks like most of those will be waiting on the new Abdera
release, i'm just doing that now so it wont be out till the weekend or
probably next week, so we'll have to wait till then for beta2.
...ant
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom
> 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version
> is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released,
> containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> ________________________________________________________________
> Raymond Feng
> rfeng@apache.org
> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> ________________________________________________________________
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>
> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>
> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>
>
> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>
> ...ant
>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Raymond Feng <cy...@gmail.com>.
I have a bunch of changes locally to upgrade Tuscany to Axis2 1.5.3, Axiom 1.2.10, Wink 1.1.2-incubating, Abdera 1.2 (to be released as the 1.1 version is not working with Axiom 1.2.10) and Jackson 1.6.3 (to be released, containing a few fixes I need). I'll let you know the progress as we go.
Thanks,
Raymond
________________________________________________________________
Raymond Feng
rfeng@apache.org
Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
________________________________________________________________
On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
>> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
>> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>>
>
> OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
>
> ...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
> starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
> enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
>
OK no objections so lets start getting the release out.
...ant
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
Yep sounds good to me. I'll go do some JIRA work. Before we suggested
starting doing this early December which is next week, is that soon
enough or does anyone want a bit more time to get something done?
...ant
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are we still up to this? It's a good opportunity to try a fast release and
> see how it goes.
> I propose that we starting adding jiras in the 2.0-beta2 category that we
> consider should be done and make an estimation on the release date (or the
> other way around). This way we'll have a target set for the next release and
> we can start working towards it. What do you think?
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:29 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 on a beta2, ideally before Christmas which would mean most things
>> would need to be done by early December.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I just closed down the 2.x Beta1 thread. Getting to Beta1 was somewhat
>> > drawn out and it feels like we still have much to do before 2.0
>> > proper. We all spotted lots of things that need further attention post
>> > Beta1 so how about we move straight on an start building toward a
>> > Beta2 while we have some momentum. I'll go ahead and create a category
>> > to collect JIRA. and try and get the things that I spotted registered
>> > there.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Simon.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> > Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>> >
>
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by Florian MOGA <mo...@gmail.com>.
Are we still up to this? It's a good opportunity to try a fast release and
see how it goes.
I propose that we starting adding jiras in the 2.0-beta2 category that we
consider should be done and make an estimation on the release date (or the
other way around). This way we'll have a target set for the next release and
we can start working towards it. What do you think?
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:29 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on a beta2, ideally before Christmas which would mean most things
> would need to be done by early December.
>
> ...ant
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > I just closed down the 2.x Beta1 thread. Getting to Beta1 was somewhat
> > drawn out and it feels like we still have much to do before 2.0
> > proper. We all spotted lots of things that need further attention post
> > Beta1 so how about we move straight on an start building toward a
> > Beta2 while we have some momentum. I'll go ahead and create a category
> > to collect JIRA. and try and get the things that I spotted registered
> > there.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Simon.
> >
> > --
> > Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
> > Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
> >
>
Re: 2.x Beta2?
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
+1 on a beta2, ideally before Christmas which would mean most things
would need to be done by early December.
...ant
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I just closed down the 2.x Beta1 thread. Getting to Beta1 was somewhat
> drawn out and it feels like we still have much to do before 2.0
> proper. We all spotted lots of things that need further attention post
> Beta1 so how about we move straight on an start building toward a
> Beta2 while we have some momentum. I'll go ahead and create a category
> to collect JIRA. and try and get the things that I spotted registered
> there.
>
> Regards
>
> Simon.
>
> --
> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>