felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre De Rop <pierre.de...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DS] State of the bundle and ready for a release ?
Date Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:56:08 GMT
Hi Felix,

>From my side, I would be happy with a new release, even if there is still
this very infrequent concurrency issue.
I only reproduce it in my test lab, but very infrequently, and I can take
time to continue to assist David and investigate with the trunk. (actually,
I don't know if my concurrency issue is the same suspected by David).

The only remark, (as said David), is that now, some tracking code are
currently active by default in the code, and it might be preferable to
activate the tracking code using LOG_DEBUG, or whatever system property.

Additionally, I think that the state trylock timeout of 5000 ms is
currently hard coded and it also might be preferable to be able to
configure it (either using a system property, or a config admin property).

Lastly, regarding the issue FELIX-3524 (scr configuration-pid from
compendium 4.3), I just checked and I forgot to modify the SCR shell in
order to dump this new component attribute (configuration-pid) using scr
shell commands, and I'll try to fix this asap, but of course it's a minor
problem which does not block a release.

kind regards;

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Felix Meschberger <fmeschbe@adobe.com>wrote:

> Hi,
> Am 29.08.2012 um 22:11 schrieb David Jencks:
> > I think I understand the cause of the currently known concurrency
> problems and hope to fix them in the next few days.  If we don't see new
> problems for a week or so I'd be very happy to go for a 1.8.0 release.  I'm
> not so thrilled about releasing the current code as it has an infrequent
> but major concurrency problem and also has a bunch of logging not really
> suitable for production to try to elucidate those concurrency problems.
>  Fortunately the logging finally worked :-)
> Understood. I would actually prefer to keep the additional logging in. We
> might degrade the level to DEBUG and even surround with "if
> (isDebugEnabled)" statements.
> >
> > I'm not sure how we could figure out an earlier version we'd like to
> release without all the DS 1.2 and proposed 1.3 features.
> My goal is for DS 1.2 completeness first and have it released.
> As for the currently proposed extensions (RFP 151,
> http://www.osgi.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=147), I think we already
> have most of them (with the notable exception of the admin API which is
> slightly different than today's API).
> >
> > Are you aware of any DS 1.2 features we haven't implemented yet?  I have
> not yet figured out how to run the CTS, the packaging seems to have changed
> a bit since the instructions were written.
> Ok, I will see, what is missing. And I can also run the CT.
> >
> > thanks!
> Also, thanks ;-)
> Regards
> Felix
> > david jencks
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 29, 2012, at 8:21 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I saw quite some activity again recently around DS. I wonder what the
> state currently is and whether we should head for an early release before
> going into another round of fixes.
> >>
> >> I could imagine, we'd do a 1.6.2 release instead of 1.8.0 and do the
> 1.8.0 release once we are complete with the implementation of the latest DS
> spec and the current concurrency issues.
> >>
> >> WDYT ?
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Felix
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message