geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <>
Subject Re: Tag 1.1 issue?
Date Fri, 07 Jul 2006 16:39:40 GMT
It would be nice to have closure on this.  Perhaps, we'll have it when OpenEJB makes it to
However, we've had issues with other Apache projects not releasing on time...Axis is the example

that comes to mind.

I think it would be nice to have everything bundled up but in many respects its outside our

Jeff Genender wrote:
> David Blevins wrote:
>> On Jul 7, 2006, at 6:32 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>>> On Jul 6, 2006, at 11:30 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>> I tried to build the v1.1 of Geronimo tag and I noticed that when I went
>>>> to do a m:co of openejb, it is giving me the openejb branch instead of
>>>> the 2.1 tag.  Sure enough, upon perusal of the tagged root maven.xml,
>>>> its pulling the openejb branch and not the tag.
>>>> I am assuming this is an oversight and it should pull the tag orf
>>>> openejb, not the branch.  Do we need this fixed so we can do a build of
>>>> our svn tagged 1.1?
>>> Yes, I noticed this yesterday, also. The build works if you don't run
>>> m:co (the openejb 2.1 dependencies). So, I don't think we need to rush
>>> to fix this. Instead we can wait to fix in the normal 1.1.1 release
>>> cycle, which I think should be soon (in July).
>>> Clearly something that needs to be in a release process checklist.
>> At release time is one of the rare moments where we don't have a
>> snapshot dependency on OpenEJB.  Why wouldn't we just disable the m:co?
> 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.
>> -David

View raw message