geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: [VOTE] geronimo-jcdi_2.0 spec jar
Date Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:16:52 GMT
+1

We should also fix the point John raised. 
John, you should now have committer rights, could you plz raise a ticket and commit it? :D

@Guillaume, I think we currently only have 2 binding votes (Romain and me), so any 'help'
would be appreciated ;)


That reminds we that the osgi module in OWB surely also needs some proper review. 
It used to work in 2010 on Equinox, but never used it ever since. 
So it might be good to check whether it is a.) still needed and b.) works at all these days
;)

txs and LieGrue,
strub 

> Am 27.06.2017 um 14:03 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> 
> well ServiceLoader doesn't work in OSGi in general - that's why we had that old ProviderLocator
but this one has the issue to not always be well shaded making classes duplicated and leadind
to issues too.
> 
> I propose we let this vote pass and see if we can do better with more recent versions
of OSGi? Any OSGi guru able to help on it?
> 
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
> 
> 2017-06-27 14:00 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>:
> I just looked, the implementation of ServiceLoader is different for SeContainerInitializer
and CDIProvider.
> 
> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/blob/trunk/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/src/main/java/javax/enterprise/inject/se/SeContainerInitializer.java#L47
> 
> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/blob/trunk/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/src/main/java/javax/enterprise/inject/spi/CDI.java#L54
> 
> I know the latter does not work on OSGi environments, it relies on TCCL.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:38 AM Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> Hi Guillaume!
> 
> I totally agree, but does this really block this release?
> I just moved over the OSGi setup from jcdi-1.1 and changed the versions.
> Is there any OSGi related bug I did overlook or is the support so far not enough?
> 
> Would it work for you to get this version out of the door and then ship some patches
which improve OSGi support?
> I'd happy to also work on improved OSGi support over at OpenWebBeans.
> But that's kind of 'improvement' and not a blocker for a release again imo, isn't?
> 
> LieGrue,
> strub
> 
> > Am 27.06.2017 um 13:29 schrieb Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org>:
> >
> > -0
> >
> > It would be nice to have all the new specs released in an OSGi compatible way or
not include OSGi support.  The current state (OSGi metadata, but no way to find the provider)
is not very satisfying imho.
> >
> > 2017-06-27 11:16 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing our geronimo-jcdi_2.0 spec jar in version 1.0
> > This is the API for CDI-2.0. The artifact does pass the CDI TCK and is binary compatible
with the official artifact (signature comparison passed).
> >
> > The staging repo is:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1034/
> >
> > The source release and binary is here:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1034/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/1.0/
> >
> > Please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] yeah, let's ship it!
> > [+0] meh, don't care
> > [-1] nope, because ${showstopper}
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h
> >
> > Here is my own +1
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message