You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwebbeans.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2021/10/03 18:56:03 UTC

Release?

Hi all,

We fixed a few issues:

PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
[image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> WebsocketUserManager
ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
[image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
@Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne> CLOSED
[image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed instance
from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark Struberg
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
RESOLVED
[image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau>
RESOLVED
[image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau>
RESOLVED

I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger a
release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.

I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore duplicated
jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.

No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.

Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you since
you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop release"
for you.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>

Re: Release?

Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
+1
but we can also wait some days or a week, no need to hurry :)

Am So., 3. Okt. 2021 um 20:56 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibucau@gmail.com>:

> Hi all,
>
> We fixed a few issues:
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> WebsocketUserManager
> ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne> CLOSED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed instance
> from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark Struberg
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
>
> I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger a
> release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
>
> I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore duplicated
> jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
>
> No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
>
> Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you since
> you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop release"
> for you.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
up? Any news on this pending change?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>


Le dim. 31 oct. 2021 à 08:05, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Hi JL,
>
> AFAIK there was a small code change to do - until I missed it - so we are
> waiting for it I guess.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le sam. 30 oct. 2021 à 13:03, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> is there any update on this?
>> How far as we from the release?
>>
>> If it's too long, can we consider doing a release now and a release after
>> the patch is complete?
>>
>> Le lun. 11 oct. 2021 à 10:26, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > I think we should wait for Arne's fix then sounds like we would be in
>> good
>> > shape.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> > <
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > Le ven. 8 oct. 2021 à 15:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
>> > écrit :
>> >
>> > > All good now.
>> > > I think we can release now
>> > >
>> > > Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > >
>> > > > All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
>> > > >
>> > > > Looking at the MyFaces issue
>> > > >
>> > > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > a
>> > > > écrit :
>> > > >
>> > > >> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if
>> > > definingService
>> > > >> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay
>> split)
>> > > >> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method
>> > > handles
>> > > >> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to
>> > bypass
>> > > >> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> > > >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> > > >> <
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> jeanouii@gmail.com>
>> > a
>> > > >> écrit :
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
>> > > >> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB
>> and a
>> > > lot
>> > > >> > more).
>> > > >> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from
>> JDK
>> > 17+
>> > > >> it
>> > > >> > does not work either.
>> > > >> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the
>> > switch
>> > > >> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to
>> > create
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > proxy from the byte array.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the
>> > same.
>> > > >> > Where it becomes different is after ...
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you
>> > somehow
>> > > >> need
>> > > >> > to instantiate it.
>> > > >> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because
>> > > there
>> > > >> is
>> > > >> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK
>> 17,
>> > > then
>> > > >> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be
>> able
>> > > to
>> > > >> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
>> > > >> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
>> > > >> Unsafe.allocateInstance
>> > > >> > won't call the default constructor.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed
>> by
>> > OWB
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can
>> switch
>> > > from
>> > > >> one
>> > > >> > to the other without side effects.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
>> > > >> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
>> > > >> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is
>> acceptable.
>> > > >> I'd go
>> > > >> > with a default method in the interface or create an
>> > > >> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my
>> opinion.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first
>> wanted
>> > to
>> > > >> add a
>> > > >> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
>> > > >> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that
>> > > using
>> > > >> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB
>> > > >> itself.
>> > > >> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the
>> security
>> > > >> > extension.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > >> a
>> > > >> > écrit :
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > > Hi JL,
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
>> > > >> constructor -
>> > > >> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
>> > > >> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an
>> > user
>> > > >> > facing
>> > > >> > > part.
>> > > >> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably
>> check
>> > > we
>> > > >> > need
>> > > >> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on
>> java 17
>> > > >> since
>> > > >> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
>> > > >> complicated
>> > > >> > > for such things ;).
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> > > >> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > > >> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > > >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > >> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> > > >> > > <
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
>> > > >> a
>> > > >> > > écrit :
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > Thanks Thomas
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
>> > > >> > > > And I pushed
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have
>> > created
>> > > a
>> > > >> PR
>> > > >> > > > sorry.
>> > > >> > > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows
>> TomEE
>> > to
>> > > >> > > override
>> > > >> > > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
>> > > >> > > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
>> > > >> > > > a écrit :
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for
>> your
>> > > fix
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis
>> MONTEIRO
>> > <
>> > > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
>> > > >> > > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change
>> in
>> > > OWB.
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > >> jb@nanthrax.net
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > a
>> > > >> > > > > > écrit :
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > +1
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > Regards
>> > > >> > > > > > > JB
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
>> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
>> > > >> > > > > WebsocketUserManager
>> > > >> > > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
>> > > Unassigned
>> > > >> > > > RESOLVED
>> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
>> > > >> > > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
>> > > >> > > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class)
>> exists
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
>> Arne
>> > > >> Limburg
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <
>> > > >> > >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
>> > > >> > > > > > > CLOSED
>> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389>
>> Remove
>> > > >> > > destroyed
>> > > >> > > > > > > instance
>> > > >> > > > > > > > from memory <
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > > Mark
>> > > >> > > > > > > Struberg
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
>> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390>
>> > support
>> > > >> > > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390>
>> Romain
>> > > >> > > > Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
>> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
>> > > >> > > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
>> > > >> > > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
>> Romain
>> > > >> > > > Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we
>> > > should
>> > > >> > > > trigger
>> > > >> > > > > a
>> > > >> > > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the
>> > > following
>> > > >> > days.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way
>> we
>> > > >> ignore
>> > > >> > > > > > duplicated
>> > > >> > > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some
>> > > >> testing.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it
>> > helps.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this
>> shouldn't
>> > > >> impact
>> > > >> > > you
>> > > >> > > > > > since
>> > > >> > > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so
>> should
>> > > be a
>> > > >> > > "noop
>> > > >> > > > > > > release"
>> > > >> > > > > > > > for you.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |
>> Blog
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > >> > > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
>> > Book
>> > > >> > > > > > > > <
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > --
>> > > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > --
>> > > >> > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > --
>> > > >> > Jean-Louis
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Jean-Louis
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hi JL,

AFAIK there was a small code change to do - until I missed it - so we are
waiting for it I guess.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>


Le sam. 30 oct. 2021 à 13:03, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> is there any update on this?
> How far as we from the release?
>
> If it's too long, can we consider doing a release now and a release after
> the patch is complete?
>
> Le lun. 11 oct. 2021 à 10:26, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > I think we should wait for Arne's fix then sounds like we would be in
> good
> > shape.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le ven. 8 oct. 2021 à 15:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > All good now.
> > > I think we can release now
> > >
> > > Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
> > > >
> > > > Looking at the MyFaces issue
> > > >
> > > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > >
> > > a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > >> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if
> > > definingService
> > > >> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay
> split)
> > > >> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method
> > > handles
> > > >> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to
> > bypass
> > > >> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
> > > >>
> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > >> <
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > a
> > > >> écrit :
> > > >>
> > > >> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> > > >> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB
> and a
> > > lot
> > > >> > more).
> > > >> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK
> > 17+
> > > >> it
> > > >> > does not work either.
> > > >> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the
> > switch
> > > >> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to
> > create
> > > >> the
> > > >> > proxy from the byte array.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the
> > same.
> > > >> > Where it becomes different is after ...
> > > >> >
> > > >> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you
> > somehow
> > > >> need
> > > >> > to instantiate it.
> > > >> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because
> > > there
> > > >> is
> > > >> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK
> 17,
> > > then
> > > >> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be
> able
> > > to
> > > >> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> > > >> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
> > > >> Unsafe.allocateInstance
> > > >> > won't call the default constructor.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by
> > OWB
> > > >> and
> > > >> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch
> > > from
> > > >> one
> > > >> > to the other without side effects.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
> > > >> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> > > >> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is
> acceptable.
> > > >> I'd go
> > > >> > with a default method in the interface or create an
> > > >> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted
> > to
> > > >> add a
> > > >> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
> > > >> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that
> > > using
> > > >> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB
> > > >> itself.
> > > >> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
> > > >> > extension.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >> a
> > > >> > écrit :
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi JL,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
> > > >> constructor -
> > > >> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> > > >> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an
> > user
> > > >> > facing
> > > >> > > part.
> > > >> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably
> check
> > > we
> > > >> > need
> > > >> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java
> 17
> > > >> since
> > > >> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
> > > >> complicated
> > > >> > > for such things ;).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > >> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > >> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > >> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > >> > > <
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > > >> a
> > > >> > > écrit :
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > Thanks Thomas
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> > > >> > > > And I pushed
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have
> > created
> > > a
> > > >> PR
> > > >> > > > sorry.
> > > >> > > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE
> > to
> > > >> > > override
> > > >> > > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > > >> > > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > a écrit :
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for
> your
> > > fix
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis
> MONTEIRO
> > <
> > > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > > >> > > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change
> in
> > > OWB.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > >> jb@nanthrax.net
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > a
> > > >> > > > > > écrit :
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > +1
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Regards
> > > >> > > > > > > JB
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > > >> > > > > WebsocketUserManager
> > > >> > > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > > Unassigned
> > > >> > > > RESOLVED
> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > >> > > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > >> > > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne
> > > >> Limburg
> > > >> > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > >> > > > > > > CLOSED
> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389>
> Remove
> > > >> > > destroyed
> > > >> > > > > > > instance
> > > >> > > > > > > > from memory <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Mark
> > > >> > > > > > > Struberg
> > > >> > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390>
> > support
> > > >> > > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390>
> Romain
> > > >> > > > Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > >> > > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > >> > > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> Romain
> > > >> > > > Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we
> > > should
> > > >> > > > trigger
> > > >> > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the
> > > following
> > > >> > days.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we
> > > >> ignore
> > > >> > > > > > duplicated
> > > >> > > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some
> > > >> testing.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it
> > helps.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this
> shouldn't
> > > >> impact
> > > >> > > you
> > > >> > > > > > since
> > > >> > > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so
> should
> > > be a
> > > >> > > "noop
> > > >> > > > > > > release"
> > > >> > > > > > > > for you.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |
> Blog
> > > >> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > >> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > >> > > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> > Book
> > > >> > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > --
> > > >> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Jean-Louis
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
is there any update on this?
How far as we from the release?

If it's too long, can we consider doing a release now and a release after
the patch is complete?

Le lun. 11 oct. 2021 à 10:26, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> I think we should wait for Arne's fix then sounds like we would be in good
> shape.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le ven. 8 oct. 2021 à 15:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > All good now.
> > I think we can release now
> >
> > Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
> > >
> > > Looking at the MyFaces issue
> > >
> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if
> > definingService
> > >> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
> > >> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method
> > handles
> > >> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to
> bypass
> > >> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
> > >>
> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> a
> > >> écrit :
> > >>
> > >> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> > >> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
> > >> >
> > >> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a
> > lot
> > >> > more).
> > >> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK
> 17+
> > >> it
> > >> > does not work either.
> > >> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the
> switch
> > >> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to
> create
> > >> the
> > >> > proxy from the byte array.
> > >> >
> > >> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the
> same.
> > >> > Where it becomes different is after ...
> > >> >
> > >> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you
> somehow
> > >> need
> > >> > to instantiate it.
> > >> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because
> > there
> > >> is
> > >> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
> > >> >
> > >> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17,
> > then
> > >> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able
> > to
> > >> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> > >> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
> > >> Unsafe.allocateInstance
> > >> > won't call the default constructor.
> > >> >
> > >> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by
> OWB
> > >> and
> > >> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch
> > from
> > >> one
> > >> > to the other without side effects.
> > >> >
> > >> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
> > >> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> > >> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable.
> > >> I'd go
> > >> > with a default method in the interface or create an
> > >> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
> > >> >
> > >> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted
> to
> > >> add a
> > >> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
> > >> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that
> > using
> > >> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB
> > >> itself.
> > >> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
> > >> > extension.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> a
> > >> > écrit :
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi JL,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
> > >> constructor -
> > >> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> > >> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an
> user
> > >> > facing
> > >> > > part.
> > >> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check
> > we
> > >> > need
> > >> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17
> > >> since
> > >> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
> > >> complicated
> > >> > > for such things ;).
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > >> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > >> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > >> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > >> > > <
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > >> a
> > >> > > écrit :
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Thanks Thomas
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> > >> > > > And I pushed
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have
> created
> > a
> > >> PR
> > >> > > > sorry.
> > >> > > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE
> to
> > >> > > override
> > >> > > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > >> > > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > a écrit :
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your
> > fix
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> <
> > >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > >> > > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in
> > OWB.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > >> jb@nanthrax.net
> > >> > >
> > >> > > a
> > >> > > > > > écrit :
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > +1
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Regards
> > >> > > > > > > JB
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > >> > > > > WebsocketUserManager
> > >> > > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > Unassigned
> > >> > > > RESOLVED
> > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > >> > > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > >> > > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne
> > >> Limburg
> > >> > > > > > > > <
> > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > >> > > > > > > CLOSED
> > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove
> > >> > > destroyed
> > >> > > > > > > instance
> > >> > > > > > > > from memory <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389
> > >> >
> > >> > > Mark
> > >> > > > > > > Struberg
> > >> > > > > > > > <
> > >> > > > >
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390>
> support
> > >> > > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
> > >> > > > Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > > > > <
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > >> > > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > >> > > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
> > >> > > > Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > > > > <
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we
> > should
> > >> > > > trigger
> > >> > > > > a
> > >> > > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the
> > following
> > >> > days.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we
> > >> ignore
> > >> > > > > > duplicated
> > >> > > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some
> > >> testing.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it
> helps.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't
> > >> impact
> > >> > > you
> > >> > > > > > since
> > >> > > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should
> > be a
> > >> > > "noop
> > >> > > > > > > release"
> > >> > > > > > > > for you.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > >> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > >> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > >> > > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> Book
> > >> > > > > > > > <
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > Jean-Louis
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Jean-Louis
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
I think we should wait for Arne's fix then sounds like we would be in good
shape.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>


Le ven. 8 oct. 2021 à 15:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> All good now.
> I think we can release now
>
> Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
> >
> > Looking at the MyFaces issue
> >
> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> >> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if
> definingService
> >> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
> >> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method
> handles
> >> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to bypass
> >> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> >> <
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> >> écrit :
> >>
> >> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> >> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
> >> >
> >> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a
> lot
> >> > more).
> >> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+
> >> it
> >> > does not work either.
> >> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
> >> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create
> >> the
> >> > proxy from the byte array.
> >> >
> >> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
> >> > Where it becomes different is after ...
> >> >
> >> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow
> >> need
> >> > to instantiate it.
> >> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because
> there
> >> is
> >> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
> >> >
> >> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17,
> then
> >> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
> >> >
> >> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able
> to
> >> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> >> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
> >> Unsafe.allocateInstance
> >> > won't call the default constructor.
> >> >
> >> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB
> >> and
> >> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch
> from
> >> one
> >> > to the other without side effects.
> >> >
> >> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
> >> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> >> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable.
> >> I'd go
> >> > with a default method in the interface or create an
> >> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
> >> >
> >> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to
> >> add a
> >> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
> >> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that
> using
> >> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB
> >> itself.
> >> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
> >> > extension.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> a
> >> > écrit :
> >> >
> >> > > Hi JL,
> >> > >
> >> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
> >> constructor -
> >> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> >> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
> >> > >
> >> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
> >> > >
> >> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user
> >> > facing
> >> > > part.
> >> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check
> we
> >> > need
> >> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17
> >> since
> >> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
> >> > >
> >> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
> >> complicated
> >> > > for such things ;).
> >> > >
> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> >> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> >> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> >> > > <
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com>
> >> a
> >> > > écrit :
> >> > >
> >> > > > Thanks Thomas
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> >> > > > And I pushed
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created
> a
> >> PR
> >> > > > sorry.
> >> > > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to
> >> > > override
> >> > > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> >> > > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> >> > > > a écrit :
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your
> fix
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> >> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> >> > > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in
> OWB.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >> jb@nanthrax.net
> >> > >
> >> > > a
> >> > > > > > écrit :
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > +1
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Regards
> >> > > > > > > JB
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> >> > > > > WebsocketUserManager
> >> > > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> Unassigned
> >> > > > RESOLVED
> >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> >> > > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> >> > > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne
> >> Limburg
> >> > > > > > > > <
> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> >> > > > > > > CLOSED
> >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove
> >> > > destroyed
> >> > > > > > > instance
> >> > > > > > > > from memory <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389
> >> >
> >> > > Mark
> >> > > > > > > Struberg
> >> > > > > > > > <
> >> > > > >
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
> >> > >
> >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> >> > > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
> >> > > > Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > > > > <
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> >> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> >> > > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> >> > > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> >> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
> >> > > > Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > > > > <
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we
> should
> >> > > > trigger
> >> > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the
> following
> >> > days.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we
> >> ignore
> >> > > > > > duplicated
> >> > > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some
> >> testing.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't
> >> impact
> >> > > you
> >> > > > > > since
> >> > > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should
> be a
> >> > > "noop
> >> > > > > > > release"
> >> > > > > > > > for you.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> >> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> >> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> >> > > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >> > > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> >> > > > > > > > <
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Jean-Louis
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Jean-Louis
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
All good now.
I think we can release now

Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
>
> Looking at the MyFaces issue
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if definingService
>> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
>> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method handles
>> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to bypass
>> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
>> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
>> >
>> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
>> > more).
>> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+
>> it
>> > does not work either.
>> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
>> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create
>> the
>> > proxy from the byte array.
>> >
>> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
>> > Where it becomes different is after ...
>> >
>> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow
>> need
>> > to instantiate it.
>> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there
>> is
>> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
>> >
>> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
>> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
>> >
>> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
>> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
>> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
>> Unsafe.allocateInstance
>> > won't call the default constructor.
>> >
>> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB
>> and
>> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from
>> one
>> > to the other without side effects.
>> >
>> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
>> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
>> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable.
>> I'd go
>> > with a default method in the interface or create an
>> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
>> >
>> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to
>> add a
>> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
>> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
>> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB
>> itself.
>> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
>> > extension.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> a
>> > écrit :
>> >
>> > > Hi JL,
>> > >
>> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
>> constructor -
>> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
>> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
>> > >
>> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
>> > >
>> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user
>> > facing
>> > > part.
>> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we
>> > need
>> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17
>> since
>> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
>> > >
>> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
>> complicated
>> > > for such things ;).
>> > >
>> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> > > <
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks Thomas
>> > > >
>> > > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
>> > > > And I pushed
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a
>> PR
>> > > > sorry.
>> > > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to
>> > > override
>> > > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
>> > > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
>> > > > a écrit :
>> > > >
>> > > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
>> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
>> > > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> jb@nanthrax.net
>> > >
>> > > a
>> > > > > > écrit :
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > +1
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
>> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
>> > > > > WebsocketUserManager
>> > > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned
>> > > > RESOLVED
>> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
>> > > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
>> > > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne
>> Limburg
>> > > > > > > > <
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
>> > > > > > > CLOSED
>> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove
>> > > destroyed
>> > > > > > > instance
>> > > > > > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389
>> >
>> > > Mark
>> > > > > > > Struberg
>> > > > > > > > <
>> > > > >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
>> > >
>> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
>> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
>> > > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
>> > > > Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > > > > <
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
>> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
>> > > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
>> > > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
>> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
>> > > > Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > > > > <
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should
>> > > > trigger
>> > > > > a
>> > > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following
>> > days.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we
>> ignore
>> > > > > > duplicated
>> > > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some
>> testing.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't
>> impact
>> > > you
>> > > > > > since
>> > > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a
>> > > "noop
>> > > > > > > release"
>> > > > > > > > for you.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> > > > > > > > <
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Louis
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK

Looking at the MyFaces issue

Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if definingService
> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method handles
> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to bypass
> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
> >
> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
> > more).
> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+ it
> > does not work either.
> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create
> the
> > proxy from the byte array.
> >
> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
> > Where it becomes different is after ...
> >
> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow
> need
> > to instantiate it.
> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there
> is
> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
> >
> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
> >
> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
> Unsafe.allocateInstance
> > won't call the default constructor.
> >
> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB
> and
> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from
> one
> > to the other without side effects.
> >
> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable. I'd
> go
> > with a default method in the interface or create an
> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
> >
> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to
> add a
> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB itself.
> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
> > extension.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Hi JL,
> > >
> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
> constructor -
> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
> > >
> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
> > >
> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user
> > facing
> > > part.
> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we
> > need
> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17
> since
> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
> > >
> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
> complicated
> > > for such things ;).
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > Thanks Thomas
> > > >
> > > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> > > > And I pushed
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> > > >
> > > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a
> PR
> > > > sorry.
> > > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to
> > > override
> > > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> > > > a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net
> > >
> > > a
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > > > > WebsocketUserManager
> > > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne
> Limburg
> > > > > > > > <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > > > > > CLOSED
> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove
> > > destroyed
> > > > > > > instance
> > > > > > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389>
> > > Mark
> > > > > > > Struberg
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
> > >
> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
> > > > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
> > > > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should
> > > > trigger
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following
> > days.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> > > > > > duplicated
> > > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some
> testing.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't
> impact
> > > you
> > > > > > since
> > > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a
> > > "noop
> > > > > > > release"
> > > > > > > > for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
+1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if definingService
is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
+1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method handles
if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to bypass
Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>


Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
>
> For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
> more).
> We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+ it
> does not work either.
> We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
> automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create the
> proxy from the byte array.
>
> OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
> Where it becomes different is after ...
>
> As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow need
> to instantiate it.
> In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there is
> no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
>
> For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
> the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
>
> I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
> override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> We can't always use the default constructor. Using Unsafe.allocateInstance
> won't call the default constructor.
>
> If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB and
> beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from one
> to the other without side effects.
>
> So functionally it's the same with my change.
> I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable. I'd go
> with a default method in the interface or create an
> InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
>
> The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to add a
> test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
> InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
> default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB itself.
> It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
> extension.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Hi JL,
> >
> > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the constructor -
> > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
> >
> > Do you have a test where this change helps?
> >
> > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user
> facing
> > part.
> > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we
> need
> > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17 since
> > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
> >
> > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be complicated
> > for such things ;).
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Thanks Thomas
> > >
> > > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> > > And I pushed
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> > >
> > > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a PR
> > > sorry.
> > > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to
> > override
> > > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> > > a écrit :
> > >
> > > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
> > > >
> > > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > > > >
> > > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
> >
> > a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > > > WebsocketUserManager
> > > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned
> > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > > > > > > <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > > > > CLOSED
> > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove
> > destroyed
> > > > > > instance
> > > > > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389>
> > Mark
> > > > > > Struberg
> > > > > > > <
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg
> >
> > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
> > > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
> > > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should
> > > trigger
> > > > a
> > > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following
> days.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> > > > > duplicated
> > > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact
> > you
> > > > > since
> > > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a
> > "noop
> > > > > > release"
> > > > > > > for you.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.

For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
more).
We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+ it
does not work either.
We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create the
proxy from the byte array.

OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
Where it becomes different is after ...

As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow need
to instantiate it.
In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there is
no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.

For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.

I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
override that behavior in TomEE at least.
We can't always use the default constructor. Using Unsafe.allocateInstance
won't call the default constructor.

If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB and
beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from one
to the other without side effects.

So functionally it's the same with my change.
I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable. I'd go
with a default method in the interface or create an
InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.

The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to add a
test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB itself.
It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
extension.






Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Hi JL,
>
> It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the constructor -
> and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> So this shouldn't help TomEE.
>
> Do you have a test where this change helps?
>
> side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user facing
> part.
> I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we need
> it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17 since
> the extension points were already set up IIRC).
>
> Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be complicated
> for such things ;).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Thanks Thomas
> >
> > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> > And I pushed
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> >
> > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a PR
> > sorry.
> > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to
> override
> > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> >
> >
> > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
> > >
> > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> > > >
> > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > > >
> > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > > WebsocketUserManager
> > > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned
> > RESOLVED
> > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > > > > > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > > > CLOSED
> > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove
> destroyed
> > > > > instance
> > > > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389>
> Mark
> > > > > Struberg
> > > > > > <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > >
> > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > >
> > > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should
> > trigger
> > > a
> > > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> > > > duplicated
> > > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact
> you
> > > > since
> > > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a
> "noop
> > > > > release"
> > > > > > for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hi JL,

It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the constructor -
and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
So this shouldn't help TomEE.

Do you have a test where this change helps?

side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user facing
part.
I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we need
it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17 since
the extension points were already set up IIRC).

Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be complicated
for such things ;).

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>


Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Thanks Thomas
>
> I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> And I pushed
>
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
>
> I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a PR
> sorry.
> Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to override
> the instanciation part to be consistent.
>
>
> Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>
> > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
> >
> > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> > >
> > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > >
> > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > > >
> > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> > WebsocketUserManager
> > > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned
> RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > > CLOSED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed
> > > > instance
> > > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark
> > > > Struberg
> > > > > <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > >
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > >
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > >
> > > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should
> trigger
> > a
> > > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> > > duplicated
> > > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> > > > >
> > > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you
> > > since
> > > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop
> > > > release"
> > > > > for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Thomas

I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
And I pushed
https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722

I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a PR
sorry.
Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to override
the instanciation part to be consistent.


Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>
a écrit :

> AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
>
> Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeanouii@gmail.com>:
>
> > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> >
> > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> >
> > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > >
> > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> WebsocketUserManager
> > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > CLOSED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed
> > > instance
> > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark
> > > Struberg
> > > > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > >
> > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger
> a
> > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> > > >
> > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> > duplicated
> > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> > > >
> > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > > >
> > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you
> > since
> > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop
> > > release"
> > > > for you.
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix

Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
jeanouii@gmail.com>:

> I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
>
> Can we reroll it after my fix?
>
> Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
> écrit :
>
> > +1
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We fixed a few issues:
> > >
> > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> WebsocketUserManager
> > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > CLOSED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed
> > instance
> > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark
> > Struberg
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > >
> > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger a
> > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> > >
> > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> duplicated
> > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> > >
> > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > >
> > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you
> since
> > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop
> > release"
> > > for you.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.

Can we reroll it after my fix?

Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
écrit :

> +1
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We fixed a few issues:
> >
> > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> WebsocketUserManager
> > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> CLOSED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed
> instance
> > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark
> Struberg
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> >
> > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger a
> > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> >
> > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore duplicated
> > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> >
> > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> >
> > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you since
> > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop
> release"
> > for you.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
+1

Regards
JB

On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> We fixed a few issues:
> 
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> WebsocketUserManager
> ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne> CLOSED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed instance
> from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark Struberg
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau>
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau>
> RESOLVED
> 
> I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger a
> release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> 
> I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore duplicated
> jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> 
> No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> 
> Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you since
> you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop release"
> for you.
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>