geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: [Vote] 1.1-rc1 Now Available
Date Tue, 13 Jun 2006 06:41:53 GMT
I think that we may need to recut the release due to http://

Apparently I forgot to convert message-destination elements in  
geronimo plans to the naming namespace and as a consequence it is  
impossible to use them in web plans.  Aside from rewriting your spec  
dds to not use message-destination or renaming stuff to auto-resolve  
I don't know of a workaround.

I think I've fixed the issue but want to think if there are any more  
cases before I close it.

My apologies,

david jencks

> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>> I apologize for resending this to the lists.  I inadvertantly did not
>> put [vote] in the subject line so it may not have been apparent.  The
>> remainder of this e-mail is the same content that was distributed  
>> last
>> night.
>> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>> Over the past few days the outstanding issues that were raised about
>>> the first candidate have been addressed.
>>> They were that we were missing the LICENSE.txt as well as Notices  
>>> from
>>> the distribution.  I added them.  Guillaume also pointed out that he
>>> noted that there should be a Third Party Notices.  This was not
>>> included in the original 1.0 or previous distributions so I did not
>>> follow it up.  Thoughts?
>>> Also, the 1.0 release notes were removed and updated the thread
>>> started by Hernan.  The Wiki has been updated and the wiki was the
>>> source used to create the RELEASE-NOTES-1.1.txt file you will  
>>> find in
>>> the build.
>>> To avoid issues with the version number and the plugins I used rc1
>>> which Aaron had added in the plugins for supported versions so I  
>>> trust
>>> that works here.
>>> JSisson addressed the problem with not being able to run Geronimo
>>> under CygWin and Kevan worked with Aaron to address a new deployment
>>> problem that left partially deployed artifacts in the repository.
>>> I have taken this build and run some performance tests on it and we
>>> are significantly better in 1.1 than we were in 1.0.  We have a  
>>> lot of
>>> improvement left for CMP EJBs.  It appears that the performance
>>> improvements in the EJB tier has changed a race condition when  
>>> running
>>> under DB2.  I'm afraid that the only way to address the problem  
>>> is to
>>> add a new feature to TranQL and OEJB that allow for the  
>>> specification
>>> of Isolation Levels for individual beans.  This is a relatively  
>>> simple
>>> change but the build as it stands is specification compliant.  I  
>>> would
>>> prefer to let this release go forward since CMP 2.1 EJBs are not
>>> nearly as common as the other J2EE components.  I would like to
>>> address this in 1.1.1 however I don't think we've locked down  
>>> whether
>>> that would be allowed or not.  The change would affect TranQL and
>>> OpenEJB so they are really included components so I'd be  
>>> interested in
>>> people's feedback.
>>> So please accept a named RC1.  Your voting and feedback are for:
>>> Geronimo 1.1
>>> DayTrader 1.1
>>> Specs 1.1
>>> The vote will stand for 72 hours.  Issues raised will be  
>>> discussed and
>>> if we conclude that there is a bug that must be addressed then we  
>>> will
>>> mitigate the problem and respin a new rc for a 72 hour vote.
>>> If this is accepted all three of the above components will be  
>>> released
>>> simultaneously.
>>> Here are the builds for your review and comment:
>>> rc1.tar.gz
>>> rc1.tar.gz
>>> rc1.tar.gz
>>> minimal-1.1-rc1.tar.gz
>>> Looking forward to your comments and feedback.

View raw message