felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Bosschaert <david.bosscha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Maybe a Felix Framework release sometime soon?
Date Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:04:18 GMT
That would be fantastic, Karl!

I think the issues around the locking are now resolved: FELIX-4190 is
resolved and I think we can close FELIX-3687 as well (correct David
J?).
I'll run trunk through the OSGi R5 CT today to double check that
everything is still passing there and will let you know when that's
done.

Cheers,

David

On 11 March 2014 12:58, Karl Pauls <karlpauls@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want me to I can cut the release if you let me know when it is
> ready...
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 9:50 AM, David Bosschaert <
> david.bosschaert@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would really like to start getting this release out, any comments on
>> Guillaume's updated patch?
>> If nobody has any comments I can just apply it and get the release
>> process rolling.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> David
>>
>> On 24 February 2014 14:07, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org> wrote:
>> > I just proposed a patch for FELIX-4190, so comments are welcomed.
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-02-24 9:50 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org>:
>> >
>> >> Do you have a patch that you could attach to FELIX-3687 that I could
>> look
>> >> at ?
>> >> Again, I have no problems reverting my patch, but I'd like FELIX-3687 /
>> >> FELIX-4190 to be fixed in some way or another, preferably the best one
>> ...
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Guillaume
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-02-23 19:25 GMT+01:00 David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>:
>> >>
>> >> As I've said before, I sort of need some advice on how to proceed to fix
>> >>> the deadlock.  I'm slightly in favor of just rolling back Guillaume's
>> fix
>> >>> since it is definitely not spec compliant.  Whether the deadlock is
>> more
>> >>> spec compliant is certainly debatable.
>> >>>
>> >>> david jencks
>> >>>
>> >>> On Feb 23, 2014, at 8:14 AM, David Bosschaert <
>> david.bosschaert@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > Hi all,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > It's been a while since this thread was started. I see that there
is
>> a
>> >>> > desire to improve on the locking, but nothing has happened in that
>> >>> > area over the past month.
>> >>> > I was thinking to start putting together a release early March,
since
>> >>> > it will be nice to have R5 core support in a release. If we can
get
>> >>> > the locking code improved before that then great, but was thinking
>> >>> > that if nothing has happened there we should postpone
>> >>> > FELIX-3687/FELIX-4190 to a later release?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Thought anyone?
>> >>> > Cheers,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > David
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On 30 January 2014 08:53, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org>
wrote:
>> >>> >> I don't have any problem reverting my fix if you have a better
one
>> ;-)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 2014-01-18 David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> I hope that someone cleans up the mess around
>> >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-3687
>> >>> >>> and
>> >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-4190
>> >>> >>> before a release candidate.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> In the first issue I proposed a patch, Richard pointed
out a
>> problem,
>> >>> and
>> >>> >>> I suggested a possible solution and haven't gotten any
comments.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> In the 2nd issue Guillaume committed a fix that is invalid
and
>> AFAIK
>> >>> it
>> >>> >>> has not been corrected.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> thanks
>> >>> >>> david jencks
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On Jan 17, 2014, at 8:40 AM, David Bosschaert <
>> >>> david.bosschaert@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>> On 17 January 2014 16:16, Carsten Ziegeler <cziegeler@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>> +1 for a new framework release, it would be great
to have full R5
>> >>> >>> support,
>> >>> >>>>> but if that is not supposed to happen soon
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Full disclosure:
>> >>> >>>> I tried my hand on those resolver related open issues,
but had the
>> >>> >>>> feeling that I didn't understand the Felix code well
enough for
>> it.
>> >>> >>>> The resolver is a pretty complex beast, especially
since it's
>> >>> >>>> recursive/re-entrant and I found that fixing one little
issue
>> would
>> >>> >>>> cause tons of other things to fall over elsewhere ;)
In the end I
>> >>> >>>> often came up with a patchwork of fixes for one resolver
CT test
>> >>> >>>> failure where I had the feeling that it could be done
more
>> elegantly.
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> so in the end I abandoned my attempts here... I think
those
>> remaining
>> >>> >>>> resolver issues are for someone who really knows the
felix
>> resolver
>> >>> >>>> code inside out :)
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> David
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Karl Pauls
> karlpauls@gmail.com
> http://twitter.com/karlpauls
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/karlpauls
> https://profiles.google.com/karlpauls

Mime
View raw message