geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Trygve Sanne Hardersen <try...@hypobytes.com>
Subject Re: geronimo 2.2 upgrades
Date Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:20:40 GMT
Hi Kevan,

I've reviewed the patches and removed company-specific changes, and
attached new ones to GERONIMO-6217. These and the old patches are now
mentioned in a new CCLA that has been emailed to secretary@apache.org.

Thanks!

Trygve

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> On Nov 18, 2011, at 6:13 AM, Trygve Sanne Hardersen wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > There will be quite a bit of work involved in splitting the patch, and
> some changes are dependent on others. Before starting this we should come
> to agreement on which specs upgrades are wanted. This will in most cases
> decide which major 3rd party frameworks should be upgraded. We should also
> decide if the "latest and greatest" approach to minor 3rd party libraries
> (typically commons-libraries) is feasible for Geronimo. There might not be
> a single answer to this.
> >
> > Yes. I don't think you should start doing any work splitting things
> apart. Let's only start that, when we feel it's necessary... Hopefully
> avoid any unnecessary work...
> >
> > The biggest issue is likely to be -- can 2.2 pass the TCK with your
> changes? We'll probably need to level-set our 2.2.1-SNAPSHOT testing -- get
> an accurate count of tests currently passing, etc. Prior to incorporating
> any changes.
> >
> > Is there any way we can do a TCK smoke test at our end?
>
> Hi Trygve,
> I'm afraid not (not yet anyway…). We obtain the Java EE TCK under the
> terms of an NDA. Access to our Java EE TCK materials is limited to Geronimo
> committers (or committers on other ASF projects) that have signed the NDA.
>
> >
> > There are some potential alternatives to consider -- e.g. build Plugins
> that can replace server functionality, rather than integrate all function
> into the server functionality. Much like the old OpenJPA plugin that added
> JPA 2.0 support, replacing the old JPA function.
> >
> > This is a good point. We've simply upgraded the plugins, but some should
> probably be implemented as new plugins instead.
> >
> >
> > To simplify the software grant portions of the CLA, it will probably be
> easiest to attach your two patch files to a Jira. Select the "donate to the
> ASF" button. Then reference these files in the CLA.
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6217
>
> Afraid I need to ask for a bit more paperwork. Schedule B of the CCLA
> needs to reference the software grant. Something like:
>
> "A code grant is attached to the JIRA issue GERONIMO-6217 in the form of
> two software patches:
>
> geronimo-2.2-1188546.patch and gshell-alpha-1-606434.patch"
>
> Sorry for the hassle. Look forward to getting your updates applied…
>
> --kevan
>
>


-- 
HypoBytes Ltd.
Kirkegata 12
9008 Tromsø
Norway

hypobytes.com
+47 40 55 30 25

Mime
View raw message