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?
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.


It will also be useful, if you (and any other participants) submit an ICLA to secretary@.

We submitted this yesterday, it's been registered.