geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Are the specs ready to go up for a release vote?
Date Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:07:19 GMT
I also think all the osgi imported packages should have a version range up
to the next major version.  Currently, those are defined as unbounded range
up to infinity is problematic if we have in the future a new incompatible
major version.

Also, I wonder if the org.apache.geronimo.osgi.registry.api package is
really optional ?  Will the specs still be usable if this package is not
present at all ?

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 20:46, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:

> Have the specs jars been tested in both a non osgi environment and an osgi
> environment ?
> Also, i'd like to have the scripting api and rest api osgi-fied the same
> way.  We'd need them in servicemix, and given you have rewritten the specs
> to support osgi, i don't see the need to maintain the servicemix ones
> anymore.
> Also, I think there is an unresolved JIRA issue (GERONIMO-3960) about the
> imported packages (they should not import their own packages).
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 19:30, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If we wish to release a milestone soon, we need to start getting the
>> different subcomponents released fairly quickly.  Here are the things I
>> believe we need to have release votes on:
>>
>> 1)  New spec components.  These need to be done first, and should probably
>> done as a single vote rather than trying to schedule a vote for each of the
>> jars.
>> 2)  New javamail jar (should probably done concurrently with the javamail
>> spec).
>> 3)  New xmlbeans schema jar releases (java ee 1.4, java ee 5, and java ee
>> 6 versions)
>> 4)  New components jars
>> 5)  New yoko jars
>> 6)  New tomcat ext jars
>>
>> For 1), I think these are ready to go.  I believe the issue of the package
>> exports has been resolved as far as it can be for the 3.1 M1 release.  The
>> jpa and servlet specs will be exporting dual version levels because the need
>> to line up with different implementations that are not conforming to the
>> OSGi specs yet.  This seems like a workable solution, at least for the short
>> term.  I believe all of our specs are currently passing the signature tests,
>> so they look clean there.  If I don't hear any objections, I'll start
>> staging these for release tomorrow morning.
>>
>> The one spec there might be a concern about is the ccpp spec jar.  This is
>> used in the pluto support currently, but we don't currently have a TCK to
>> validate this one.  I need some opinions on how to proceed with that jar.
>>  For now, I'll not be submitting this one for a vote with the rest of the
>> specs.
>>
>> What state are the rest of these in?  I suspect yoko is not stable enough
>> currently since David Jencks is currently working on getting the Corba
>> support working.  We might want to delay the tomcat external release as long
>> as we can in case we require some patches.  "As long as we can" is probably
>> not more than a week.  The xmlbeans schema jars are probably pretty stable
>> and capable of being released now.
>>
>> Are the components in any shape that release votes can be started?  Here
>> are the components we need to release:
>>
>> - geronimo-connector
>> - geronmo-transaction
>> - geronimo-jaspi
>>
>> This will need to be handled fairly soon too.
>>
>> Rick
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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