Mailing-List: contact dev-help@aries.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@aries.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com
 designates 209.85.212.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJo0kgquEuV7idd7LckPZmWHZLvUhiZ0Z-DFW=BFzwwxmzD62A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAC9tjn-6_4eJkTrWHis4wKN7Yi+HXB8xerwRs99+EagA1xR9GA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEQV+EFybOMdnhpUCEKEZiFPr1tUZztqtbZeV9=8yKnziq8P4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJo0kgquEuV7idd7LckPZmWHZLvUhiZ0Z-DFW=BFzwwxmzD62A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 17:11:43 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAC9tjn86T1SXfevwKghhZ5G3cmAYFpCHQf_EaDfwTtrhSR8ASA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Incoming code: The Big Move to 1.0.0
From: Holly Cummins <holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com>
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Comments inline.

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Alasdair Nottingham <not@apache.org> wrote:
> Holly,
>
> Have we addressed the utils defect that includes a list of things that are
> required for a 1.0 release?

I think that's https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-582, which
is resolved.

> Also the RecursiveBundleTracker behaves
> differently if you run on an R4.3 framework to an R4.2 framework. It
> doesn't work with our application isolation model (which it was designed to
> do) and works differently if we had a resolver hook isolation
> implementation (if we don't). I think that needs to be resolved. Having it
> behave weirdly isn't good.

Aha, this is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-827, isn't
it? Which is unresolved, sadly.

> I also think we need to ensure we pass the OSGi CTs for things like
> blueprint, JMX etc before we release a 1.0 level (people will be surprised
> if we don't). I think blueprint still has a few issues, although JNDI
> passed last time I ran the CT as did JMX (well there were failures, but the
> failures were due to bad tests).

I think this makes sense. I'll have a look at running the Blueprint
CTs first, since that's the component I'm intending to release first.

>
> Thanks
> Alasdair
>
> P.S. Thanks for doing work here.
>
> On 11 May 2012 10:55, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I wonder if it would make sense to move all packages to 1.0 version ?
>>
>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Holly Cummins <
>> holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I'm just about to commit the big change which moves most Aries components
>> > to 1.0.0 bundle and package versions. You may need to do a full rebuild,
>> > starting with parent and eva-maven-plugin, to populate your maven repo.
>> >
>> > I've left some components I judged to be pre-1.0.0 at their current
>> > versions. I also think jmx will need revisiting once jmx-next is merged
>> > across. Even so, there were a lot of changes, so I undoubtedly got some
>> > things wrong! Please let me know if you spot any errors or omissions or
>> if
>> > you think it all just looks terrible.
>> >
>> > Holly
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> FuseSource, Integration everywhere
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alasdair Nottingham
> not@apache.org