Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of mail2jimma@gmail.com designates
 209.85.210.169 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=sPN/0oTbPOK51OFs9Ey1Zb9qJGMpaBmOqG3Fah7D7lGaasdHVUOJdpuEdqTn5HviZX
         1CnTCiI7ao8SrcgWM9eoDcYTVn/AVF8Rsse3UYqYJRkQDaTylvvZIeFunk1BnHQG5Cgh
         mi48Kzk2HMH3nrcdazKM1ftJs4UMwSsCnpjN8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: ema@apache.org
In-Reply-To: <201101200008.42998.dkulp@apache.org>
References: <201101172326.13986.dkulp@apache.org>
	<4D37ADFC.4030203@gmail.com>
	<4D37B307.3020503@gmail.com>
	<201101200008.42998.dkulp@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:11:29 +0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTikq=dxsLfAhmJQUHM6U9j2oneCX0gnVMxrRu9XA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.2
From: Jim Ma <mail2jimma@gmail.com>
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Dan.  My fix  to CXF-3209 introduced these regression failures
. I've reverted these changes in 2.3.x branch . I'll look this issue
again and provide some better test for it .


On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I want to give Jim a bit more time to investigate what is causing the
> failures. =A0I chatted with him a bit on IRC and I'm not exactly sure how=
 the
> test is SUPPOSED to work at all so it's hard to say what is going on.
>
> THAT said, -1's on release votes are not a veto. =A0Thus, as release mana=
ger,
> it's my discretion as to how to handle the -1. =A0 My gut feeling, right =
now,
> would be to release 2.3.2 "as is" as the standalone JAX-WS TCK does pass =
and
> thus all of OUR claims are OK. =A0 Once we get a handle on the J2EE level
> things, we can quickly spin a 2.3.3. =A0 I really have no issues with a "=
release
> often" approach.
>
> That said, I do want to give Jim a little more time to look into it. =A0S=
ince
> there is still 20ish hours left on the vote, it's not something I'll comm=
it to
> either way RIGHT NOW. =A0 It may end being something JBoss can work aroun=
d and
> we won't need to worry about it. (that has happened a couple times in the
> past)
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Wednesday 19 January 2011 10:59:03 pm Glen Mazza wrote:
>> I don't think a new vote is necessary, because as stated the vote covers
>> both portions. =A0So everyone has voted +1 and +1 up to Jim.
>>
>> To be valid, a veto must have a justifiable reason, and Jim certainly
>> does have one for CXF 2.3.2 but not CXF XJC 2.3.2, so the latter can
>> still proceed (if desirable). =A0I would very much like to get CXF XJC
>> 2.3.2 fixed so I don't have to keep taking out the JAXB 2.2 libraries
>> from my JDK when I try to make a build. =A0That said, I suspect Dan
>> wouldn't want to release one without the other, it's just that a second
>> vote isn't needed IMO.
>>
>> Glen
>>
>> On 19.01.2011 22:37, Willem Jiang wrote:
>> > Maybe we can consider to release XJC 2.3.2 as it doesn't relate to TCK
>> > failures. And we don't need to cut new version of XJC 2.3.2 again.
>> >
>> > Can we start a new vote for CXF XJC 2.3.2 ?
>> >
>> > Willem
>> >
>> > On 1/20/11 11:02 AM, Jim Ma wrote:
>> >> I have to vote -1 for this release.
>> >> The new changes in tagged CXF 2.3.2 =A0introduced several JEE6 TCK
>> >> regression failures . I am looking for a quick fix for these failures=
.
>> >>
>> >> Jim
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Eric
>> >>
>> >> Johnson<emjohnson@fusesource.com> =A0wrote:
>> >>> +1
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Christian Schneider
>> >>>
>> >>> <chris@die-schneider.net> =A0wrote:
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Christian
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Am 18.01.2011 05:26, schrieb Daniel Kulp:
>> >>>>> We've had a busy 8 weeks or so despite the holidays. =A0 We've
>> >>>>> managed to
>> >>>>> fix over 75 JIRA issues since 2.3.1 which is quite remarkable .
>> >>>>> This also
>> >>>>> fixes a bunch of OSGi related issues that are needed for
>> >>>>> Camel and ServiceMix.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Note: =A0this vote also includes a release of the cxf-xjc-utils to
>> >>>>> fix a
>> >>>>> bunch of issues that were resolved there.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> List of issues:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=3D1=
23159
>> >>>>> 21&styleName=3DText&projectId=3D12310511&Create=3DCreate
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The Maven staging areas are at:
>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecxf-04=
1/
>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecxf-04=
2/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The distributions are in:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecxf-04=
2/o
>> >>>>> rg/apache/cxf/apache-cxf/2.3.2/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This release is tagged at:
>> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cxf/tags/cxf-2.3.2
>> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cxf/xjc-utils/tags/xjc-utils-2.3.2=
/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Here is my +1.
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog
>