Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-felix-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 24854 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2011 19:39:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Feb 2011 19:39:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 97519 invoked by uid 500); 20 Feb 2011 19:39:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-felix-dev-archive@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 97434 invoked by uid 500); 20 Feb 2011 19:39:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 97424 invoked by uid 99); 20 Feb 2011 19:39:03 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:39:03 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of fmeschbe@adobe.com designates 64.18.1.181 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.18.1.181] (HELO exprod6og101.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:38:53 +0000 Received: from source ([193.104.215.16]) by exprod6ob101.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTWFtt+1rgpHtyoK1WeGS0b9GYb25MQXE@postini.com; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:38:33 PST Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id p1KJcUjX008263 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:38:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from nahub01.corp.adobe.com (nahub01.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.97]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id p1KJcTdM018437 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:38:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from eurcas01.eur.adobe.com (10.128.4.27) by nahub01.corp.adobe.com (10.8.189.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.137.0; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:38:29 -0800 Received: from [10.136.135.58] (10.136.135.58) by eurcas01.eur.adobe.com (10.128.4.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.137.0; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:38:27 +0000 Subject: [framework] Changes between 3.0.2 and 3.0.8 (was: [jira] Commented: (FELIX-2851) Resolution problems after a fragment can't be resolved) From: Felix Meschberger To: "dev@felix.apache.org" In-Reply-To: <1139201452.2164.1298071778431.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> References: <1139201452.2164.1298071778431.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:38:26 +0100 Message-ID: <1298230706.4515.30.camel@meschbix> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, Am Freitag, den 18.02.2011, 23:29 +0000 schrieb Guillaume Nodet (JIRA): > so it may introduce different behaviors. We already had problems when trying to upgrade from 3.0.2 to 3.0.8 so I wonder if creating a 3.0.9 bug fix release before you put in the new resolver would be a good idea. We also noticed differences in behaviour particularly with respect to using classes from the environment. The biggest problems we encountered were around using XML factory classes. Is there a single point of information on what exactly changed ? RTFM links welcome. Thanks a lot ! Regards Felix