geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release Geronimo components 2.2 (tx manager / connector)
Date Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:04:15 GMT
I thought I had already bundleized 2.1.... since we are using the  
2.0.0 bundle plugin a direct merge or [1] won't work.  In the  
interests of my learning how to set this stuff up I just committed a  
bundleization of 2.1.  Can you please check it?  In particular, should  
the import of javax.resource in txmanager be optional?

thanks
david jencks

On Sep 3, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:

> I'd like this commit [1] to be releases somehow.
> I'll backport it to the 2.1 branch asap.
>
> [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=615758
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 18:00, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>  
> wrote:
>
> On Sep 3, 2009, at 1:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
>> A long time ago, I've made those two jars available as OSGi  
>> bundles, but they haven't been released yet because I did that in  
>> trunk.
>> I'd really like to have those as bundles, so I can backport the pom  
>> changes in the branch and release from the branch or release trunk.
>> Not sure what the exact status for this component is.  I've seen  
>> djencks made some changes in the branch that are not available in  
>> trunk, but trunk also has some changes.
>
> Can you be more specific about the changes and which svn urls you  
> are talking about?
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/txmanager/ 
> trunk  uses connector 1.6 spec, so I don't think we will release it  
> until we have some idea that we are fairly OK with the ee6 tck, and  
> also that it works with whatever osgi stuff we end up with in g.  
> trunk.
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/txmanager/branches/geronimo-txmanager-parent-2.1

>  uses connector 1.5 and we need to release it for g. 2.2 as it has  
> some important bug fixes.
>
> Making sure both of these are osgi-workable would be great.  I  
> thought I'd merged all the bug fixes both ways between these  
> branches, if you see a problem please let me know!
>
> I'm hoping to get to releasing some specs and other sub-projects for  
> 2.2 this week, so if you can make sure the 2.1 branch is acceptable  
> that would be really great!
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
>> Please advise what would be the best way to proceed here.
>>
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
>


Mime
View raw message