aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Aries release
Date Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:22:22 GMT
I agree - and that is the reason why I pointed out the SNAPSHOT.  Even 
though it is not included in our binary artifacts, it would prohibit the 
ability to generate a consistent binary from the released source - and, 
as Guillaume points out, we are really voting on the source.

IMHO we must remove this SNAPSHOT dependency before we can create a 
release candidate - either by reverting to a released version of the 
maven-bundle-plugin or by getting 2.1.0 released first.


Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> No, it's not.  We should never release anything with a snapshot dependency.
>  That would make the build much more likely to not succeed in the future, as
> snapshots are meant to be deleted from repositories from time to time.
> FWIW, I could try to release the new maven bundle plugin next week or so.
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 15:21, Jeremy Hughes <> wrote:
>> On 24 March 2010 19:19, Joe Bohn <> wrote:
>>> Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>> Hi Don, I think we're close. I had wanted to get artifacts up to vote
>>>> on this week. I guess the open jpa release vote closes 2am GMT
>>>> Saturday and those fixes for Aries JPA issues are OPENJPA-1491 and
>>>> OPENJPA-1524 right? There are workaround for both the 1491 workaround
>>>> is in Aries itself so that wouldn't affect users, the workaround for
>>>> 1524 mentioned by Joe is a change to a blueprint.xml so impacts users.
>>>> Ideally I'd like to pull in beta3. Anyone else have a preference?
>>> I agree that we should pull in beta3 and drop the work-around.
>>> I'd also like to point out that we are still using a SNAPSHOT version of
>> the
>>> maven-bundle-plugin (2.1.0-SNAPSHOT) and, as Guillaume mentioned in a
>> recent
>>> post - there are still changes being made to this plugin.  We would need
>> an
>>> official release of this plugin before we could make an Aries release.
>> OK, so what's the rule here w.r.t using SNAPSHOTS when you release? Is
>> it: users shouldn't be expected to use SNAPSHOTs of depedencies. Or is
>> it: people who want to build the code themselves shouldn't be expected
>> to have to download SNAPSHOTs. If the former then maven-bundle-plugin
>> can be a SNAPSHOT right?
>> mvn release:prepare asks this:
>> There are still some remaining snapshot dependencies.: Do you want to
>> resolve them now? (yes/no) no: : yes
>> Dependency type to resolve,: specify the selection number ( 0:All
>> 1:Project Dependencies 2:Plugins 3:Reports 4:Extensions ): (0/1/2/3)
>> 1: :
>> is it ok release if you accept the default of 1?
>>> Is
>>> this something that you are working on Guillaume?
>>> Joe
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jeremy
>>>> There I think it's worth waiting that little bit extra for it so the
>>>> 1524 workaround isn't needed
>>>> On 24 March 2010 02:39, Donald Woods <> wrote:
>>>>> What's the status on a release?  I've just put a openjpa-2.0.0-beta3
>>>>> for a vote, which includes fixes for two Aries JPA issues....
>>>>> -Donald
>>>>> On 1/26/10 12:34 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>> There's been a lot of activity lately so I'd like to propose we do
>>>>>> release so we can get some wider user feedback. I think we should
>>>>>> it a version of 0.1 and stick to versions <1 while we're in the
>>>>>> Incubator.
>>>>>> Then there is the question of whether to independently version the
>>>>>> high level modules or keep them lock-step. For now I think we should
>>>>>> keep them lock-step until we feel a need to change that.
>>>>>> What does everyone think?
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Jeremy
>>> --
>>> Joe


View raw message