jakarta-bsf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: BSF 3.0 release?
Date Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:53:51 GMT
On 28/07/2009, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27/07/2009, Rony G. Flatscher <Rony.Flatscher@wu-wien.ac.at> wrote:
>  > Hi Sebb,
>  >
>  >
>  >  sebb wrote:
>  >  > Is there any interest in releasing a non-Beta 3.0 version of BSF?
>  >  >
>  >  > I'd like to update JMeter to use BSF 3, and would prefer to ship it
>  >  > with a non-Beta release if possible.
>  >  >
>  >  > There don't seem to be any outstanding JIRA bugs for 3.0.
>  >  >
>  >  > I found a minor problem with the Main class (throws NPE rather than
>  >  > reporting that it cannot find a language implementation) which I will
>  >  > fix shortly.
>
>
> I found I had already fixed it; but it missed the last release.
>
>  There is another problem, which is that the -lang option says it takes
>  the language as a value; however it actually requires the extension.
>
>  I'd like to correct this, and add an option to use the short language
>  name (e.g. jython).
>
>  Ideally I'd like to
>  rename -lang to -ext and
>  add -lang to mean shortLanguage

I've committed this change, and also added a -show option.

>  This would only affect the utility main class, but would potentially
>  break some scripts.
>
>  As there has yet to be a formal release, perhaps this does not matter?
>
>
>
>  >  > I also think it would be useful to add the Main class to the manifest
>  >  > so one can execute the jar directly.

Tried this, but it does not help as additional jars are needed (-jar
overrides classpath).

>  >  >
>  >  > Any thoughts?
>  >  >
>  >
>  > Well, I guess it would be o.k. to go for a release as it psychologically
>  >  might make a differences.

In fact I found (and fixed) a bug in one of the javax classes, so it
would be useful to do another release at some point.

>  >  ---
>  >
>  >  Have been waiting on getting somehow access to the JSR-223 TCK. My last
>  >  attempt a couple of months (sending an e-Mail to the spec lead Mike
>  >  Grogan) resulted in an e-mail-address error from the Sun mailer to the
>  >  effect that that e-mail address was unknown. Just tried it again and
>  >  received:
>  >
>  >     This report relates to a message you sent with the following header fields:
>  >
>  >       Message-id: <4A6E17AA.2080500@wu-wien.ac.at>
>  >       Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:10:02 +0200
>  >       From: "Rony G. Flatscher" <Rony.Flatscher@wu-wien.ac.at>
>  >       To: Mike.Grogan@sun.com
>  >       Subject: Ping ...
>  >
>  >     Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients:
>  >
>  >       Recipient address: @sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:Mike.Grogan@sun.com
>  >       Original address: Mike.Grogan@sun.com
>  >       Reason: Remote SMTP server has rejected address
>  >       Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.1.1 <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:Mike.Grogan@sun.com>...
User unknown
>  >       Remote system: dns;sunmail5.uk.sun.com (TCP|129.146.11.74|57021|129.156.85.165|25)
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >
>  >     Original-envelope-id: 0KNG00D08LLMIA00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM
>  >     Reporting-MTA: dns;nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (tcp-daemon)
>  >
>  >     Original-recipient: rfc822;Mike.Grogan@sun.com
>  >     Final-recipient: rfc822;@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:Mike.Grogan@sun.com
>  >     Action: failed
>  >     Status: 5.1.1 (Remote SMTP server has rejected address)
>  >     Remote-MTA: dns;sunmail5.uk.sun.com (TCP|129.146.11.74|57021|129.156.85.165|25)
>  >     Diagnostic-code: smtp;550 5.1.1
>  >      <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:Mike.Grogan@sun.com>... User unknown
>  >
>  >
>  >  Not sure, whether this is a relaying error or not.
>  >
>  >  Anyway, in March I posted on the ASF jcp list another request to Geir
>  >  w.r.t. JSR-223 therefore (and cc'ed it to this list), but that has not
>  >  brought up news so far either.
>
>
> That's a pity.
>
>  But if we do eventually get the TCK, we could release 3.0.1 or 3.1
>  after testing.
>
>
>  >  ---
>  >
>  >  So again, whatever you think serves the purpose best, it has my +1.
>  >
>  >  HTH,
>  >
>  >
>  >  ---rony
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message