geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@visi.com>
Subject Re: Tag 1.1 issue?
Date Fri, 07 Jul 2006 18:39:24 GMT

On Jul 7, 2006, at 8:41 AM, 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.
>

Makes sense.

-David


Mime
View raw message