Re: [DISCUSS] supporting different spec versions

[Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>]

#1


2014-06-30 23:32 GMT+02:00 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>:

> I think #1 is really the only way we can realistically continue forward. We
> should communicate though that those matrices which use earlier versions of
> the spec(s) probably will not receive as much attention, probably just bug
> fixes, unless we can refactor to a base for those modules and then add new
> things in base where appropriate.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 5:17 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'd agree to #1.  I was actually thinking recently about how to
> > re-implement core using CDI 1.1 features.  I'll send out a separate
> > email RE that.
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ok, so I'd say 1.
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-06-29 0:46 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> >:
> > >> no - i contacted esp. one server team months ago and they promised to
> > fix
> > >> it.
> > >> however, the latest release contains fixes for several issues i
> reported
> > >> except this one.
> > >> (and afaik there won't be any new ee6 release any time soon and an ee7
> > >> release might take some time as well.)
> > >>
> > >> since we might see similar issues with ee8+, we need a nice approach.
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> gerhard
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2014-06-29 0:09 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> > >>
> > >>> +0 for 1
> > >>> -1 for 2 (otherwise a single branch will be maintained in practise)
> > >>> are we able to "fix" them? for 3
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > >>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> > >>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> > >>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> 2014-06-29 0:03 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >>> > hi @ all,
> > >>> >
> > >>> > as we have seen e.g. as7 logs exceptions during the startup due to
> > our
> > >>> > optional classes (needed for jsf 2.2+).
> > >>> > since we really need at least some of them (otherwise we would
> break
> > jsf
> > >>> > 2.2+ applications), we said that users should ignore those log
> > entries
> > >>> > (there is no impact later on).
> > >>> > however, there are other servers which don't ignore it and the
> > deployment
> > >>> > fails.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > we have different options here - e.g.:
> > >>> > #1 special modules once they are needed
> > >>> > #2 one branch per java ee version
> > >>> > #3 keep it as it is (and ignore those servers)
> > >>> >
> > >>> > regards,
> > >>> > gerhard
> > >>>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jason Porter
> http://en.gravatar.com/lightguardjp
>