geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Tag 1.1 issue?
Date Sun, 09 Jul 2006 07:30:26 GMT

On Jul 8, 2006, at 2:08 PM, David Blevins wrote:

> On Jul 8, 2006, at 2:54 AM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
>> On 7/7/06, Jeff Genender <> wrote:
>>> I still believe there is value getting the state of OpenEJB at  
>>> tagged
>>> level and accessing it with m:co.  Here is an example...
>>> I am trying to research some classloading issues regarding  
>>> OpenEJB and
>>> Geronimo 1.1.  It behooves me to have source level access to both
>>> OpenEJB and Geronimo for the state of the Geronimo 1.1 release so  
>>> I can
>>> accurately debug the problem.  It would be nice to have the m:co
>>> checkout the tagged version of OpenEJB since we are not really  
>>> supposed
>>> to have any snapshots in there.
>> I'll do you one even better, Jeff ...
>> I've just discovered that geronimo/tags/1.1.0 depends on openejb 2.1
>> branch which depends on geronimo-1.1.1-SNAPSHOT.
> Right, geronimo-1.1-SNAPSHOT (not 1.1.1-SNAPSHOT).
>> This means that any
>> user with a clean environment who is interested in building Geronimo
>> 1.1 from source and somehow figures out that Geronimo 1.1resides in
>> geronimo/tags/1.1.0 and follows the bulid instructions on the wiki
>> will wind up with the following error:
> I'm fine documenting this as long as it's made completely clear it  
> isn't at all necessary.  One can build Geronimo just fine when  
> skipping the optional 'm:co' step.
>> Those are missing deps on Geronimo 1.1.1 while building Geronimo 1.1.
>> In other words, geronimo/tags/1.1.0 is permanently broken. IMO, this
>> issue is worse than we originally thought.
> Not that I don't agree it's a screwed up situation, but geronimo/ 
> tags/1.1.0 is perfectly fine -- building openejb is optional.  It's  
> openejb/tags/v2_1/ that's permanently broken.  In fact all the  
> openejb 2x tags are broken in exactly the same way.  All openejb  
> 2.x releases are cut before Geronimo releases so a given Geronimo  
> release doesn't have to have a snapshot dependency on openejb.
>> To fix this issue, I changed m:checkout to grab the openejb 2.1 tag.
>> Then I changed the geronimo_version in my local copy of the openejb
>> 2.1 tag from 1.1-SNAPSHOT to 1.1. After this, Geronimo 1.1 built
>> successfully for me.
>> At a minimum this solution should be documented in the appropriate
>> locations. Maximally, we should consider fixing 1.1.
> What would you recommend?

I think that we need to release like this:

geronimo jars (and possibly non-openejb configs) (possibly also non- 
openejb assemblies such as minimal)

openejb jars (and possibly openejb configs)

other configs (???? perhaps these should all be independently  
released plugins)


I don't think we can realistically do this on the 1.1/2.1 branches  
but it might be a realistic goal for 1.2/2.2

david jencks

> -David

View raw message