myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan-Kees van Andel <jankeesvanan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
Date Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:04:14 GMT
+1 for a new alpha release. Actually I support everything in the
process that allows bugs to be detected early.

Though, I haven't seen much MF 2.0 user activity until now (mailing
list activity, issues...). We have some catching up to do with
Mojarra.

/JK


2009/12/29 Jakob Korherr <jakob.korherr@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> +1 for a beta release.
>
> As far as I know there are just a few more things to do, mostly regarding
> f:ajax and some other minor issues.
>
> I am currently working on MYFACES-2363 - this will be in place soon!
>
> Regards,
>
> Jakob Korherr
>
> 2009/12/29 Leonardo Uribe <lu4242@gmail.com>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a
>> release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10.
>>
>> My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe
>> we should release as beta or release candidate).
>>
>> MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax
>> responses
>> MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for
>> getProjectStage
>> Commit all pending patches.
>> Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component
>> generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam "deprecated"
>> property).
>>
>> Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as
>> these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>> 2009/12/29 Grant Smith <work.grant@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> I would say definitely release a new one...
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> cool.
>>>>
>>>> Leo, all:
>>>> do you have the feeling we may need a new alpha? I saw some fixes
>>>> coming in, and producing some
>>>> alphas at least gives us more visibility :-)
>>>>
>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu4242@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Hi
>>>> >
>>>> > I deploy a snapshot here:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/myfaces/core/
>>>> >
>>>> > regards,
>>>> >
>>>> > Leonardo Uribe
>>>> >
>>>> > 2009/12/27 Jan-Kees van Andel <jankeesvanandel@gmail.com>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I don't see the problem of building a snapshot, but for some reason
>>>> >> Continuum is unavailable. I get a "Connection Reset" http error.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm also not sure if I have build rights in Continuum, but I'm sure
>>>> >> some guys on this thread do...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> /JK
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 2009/12/26 David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>:
>>>> >> > Many thanks for applying this!
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > If it doesn't go against any myfaces development policies,
it would
>>>> >> > be
>>>> >> > great
>>>> >> > if someone could deploy a snapshot built after this patch.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > thanks
>>>> >> > david jencks
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893759
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> David, thanks for the patch
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> -Matthias
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Scott O'Bryan
>>>> >> >> <darkarena@gmail.com>
>>>> >> >> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Yah guys, thanks for clearing that up.  Your right
that I didn't
>>>> >> >>> take
>>>> >> >>> a look at the patch and mis understood your proposal.
 +1 to the
>>>> >> >>> patch.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>> <matzew@apache.org>
>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>> Hey David,
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks
>>>> >> >>>> <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I'm afraid there is still a lot of confusion
about the proposed
>>>> >> >>>>> patch.  The
>>>> >> >>>>> comments don't appear to me to relate to the
patch.   I'm not
>>>> >> >>>>> sure
>>>> >> >>>>> how to
>>>> >> >>>>> proceed other than through excessive and rather
obnoxious
>>>> >> >>>>> repetition, for
>>>> >> >>>>> which I apologize.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> :-) No worries
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  If there is some more information I could
provide to
>>>> >> >>>>> clear things up please let me know what it
is.  I could provide
>>>> >> >>>>> before-and-after manifest.mf but in my experience
these are
>>>> >> >>>>> really
>>>> >> >>>>> hard to
>>>> >> >>>>> see what is going on in due to the rather opaque
formatting
>>>> >> >>>>> rules,
>>>> >> >>>>> I think
>>>> >> >>>>> the maven-bundle-plugin configuration from
the patch is a lot
>>>> >> >>>>> clearer.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> +1 on a patch
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Scott O'Bryan
wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I think I agree with Matthias that this may
be problematic.  If
>>>> >> >>>>> you
>>>> >> >>>>> compile
>>>> >> >>>>> something against Servlet 3.0 classes, you
very well may run
>>>> >> >>>>> into
>>>> >> >>>>> some
>>>> >> >>>>> runtime issues if you then try to use those
binaries in a
>>>> >> >>>>> Servlet
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.5 type
>>>> >> >>>>> environment.  You generally *WILL NOT* run
into problems if you
>>>> >> >>>>> do
>>>> >> >>>>> the
>>>> >> >>>>> reverse.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> True, but irrelevant to the change proposed
in the patch.  The
>>>> >> >>>>> patch does
>>>> >> >>>>> not change any dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think that was misunderstood ?
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Now that's not to say it's impossible.  Trinidad,
for instance,
>>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>>> >> >>>>> against the Portlet 2.0 jars yet we work in
Portlet 1.0 as
>>>> >> >>>>> well,
>>>> >> >>>>> but we had
>>>> >> >>>>> to use a bunch of proxy objects attached to
interfaces and a
>>>> >> >>>>> lot of
>>>> >> >>>>> reflection to get this to work correctly.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I guess I'm wondering what issue you have right
now with the
>>>> >> >>>>> current
>>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> None, I'm not proposing changing any dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think it is now more clear
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Just because myfaces depends on Servlet 2.5
does not mean that
>>>> >> >>>>> geronimo
>>>> >> >>>>> can't depend on Servlet 3.0.  They should
both be "provided"
>>>> >> >>>>> dependencies.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> The patch does not relate to maven dependencies
in any way.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> Yes, correct
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> If you *DO* need Servlet 3.0 support as a library,
I would
>>>> >> >>>>> suggest
>>>> >> >>>>> adding it
>>>> >> >>>>> as a profile which DOES NOT run by default..
 Just my $.02..
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> A profile would not be able to affect this
issue, since we need
>>>> >> >>>>> different
>>>> >> >>>>> osgi metadata in the published jars.  We don't
care what
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> builds
>>>> >> >>>>> against.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> fair enough :-)
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> So, here's the patch:
>>>> >> >>>>> Index: impl/pom.xml
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> >> >>>>> --- impl/pom.xml        (revision 892639)
>>>> >> >>>>> +++ impl/pom.xml        (working copy)
>>>> >> >>>>> @@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.naming,
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.persistence;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.portlet;version="[1.0.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.1)";resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0,
3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.xml.parsers,
>>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache;resolution:=optional,
>>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.beanutils;version="[1.7.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> Index: api/pom.xml
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> >> >>>>> --- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
>>>> >> >>>>> +++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
>>>> >> >>>>> @@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
>>>> >> >>>>>                 </Export-Package>
>>>> >> >>>>>                 <Import-Package>
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.el;version="[1.0.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet;version="[2.5.0,
3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.http;version="[2.5.0,
3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp;version="[2.1.0,
3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version="[1.1.2,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> -                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>> +                  javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version="[2.1.0,
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.1)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,
>>>> >> >>>>> 2.0.0)",
>>>> >> >>>>>                   javax.faces.*;version="${project.version}"
>>>> >> >>>>>                 </Import-Package>
>>>> >> >>>>> I think it's fairly clear that this does not
change the maven
>>>> >> >>>>> dependencies
>>>> >> >>>>> or what myfaces is building against.  All
it does is allow
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>>> >> >>>>> used in an osgi environment with a servlet
3 spec jar.  That is
>>>> >> >>>>> currently
>>>> >> >>>>> not possible.  This is blocking geronimo-myfaces
2 integration.
>>>> >> >>>>>  I
>>>> >> >>>>> can't
>>>> >> >>>>> imagine any scenario that currently works that
this proposed
>>>> >> >>>>> change
>>>> >> >>>>> would
>>>> >> >>>>> affect, all it does is allow myfaces to be
used in more
>>>> >> >>>>> environments.  If
>>>> >> >>>>> you think this change will prevent a currently
working scenario
>>>> >> >>>>> from working
>>>> >> >>>>> please explain what it is and how.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think I am totally fine on the <Import-Package>
changes.
>>>> >> >>>> Let me give your patch a try.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> David, thanks for bugging you on that, again.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> -Matthias
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> thanks
>>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Scott
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Matthias,
>>>> >> >>>>> I'm not sure you understand what Ivan is requesting.
 The osgi
>>>> >> >>>>> package
>>>> >> >>>>> version metadata does not specify what jar
myfaces is built
>>>> >> >>>>> against, but
>>>> >> >>>>> does restrict which package versions myfaces
can be used with
>>>> >> >>>>> in an
>>>> >> >>>>> osgi
>>>> >> >>>>> environment.   While the osgi package version
metadata is not
>>>> >> >>>>> part
>>>> >> >>>>> of javaee
>>>> >> >>>>> specs, there seems to be general agreement
that the spec
>>>> >> >>>>> version
>>>> >> >>>>> should be
>>>> >> >>>>> used as the package version for api jars.  So,
in order for
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> to be
>>>> >> >>>>> used in a javee 6 environment, it needs to
allow wiring to a
>>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3.0
>>>> >> >>>>> spec jar.  That doesn't mean that you need
to build myfaces
>>>> >> >>>>> against
>>>> >> >>>>> a
>>>> >> >>>>> servlet 3 jar, nor does it prevent myfaces
from working with
>>>> >> >>>>> servlet 2.5
>>>> >> >>>>> spec jars in, say, a javaee 5 environment.
>>>> >> >>>>> I'd appreciate it if someone could update trunk
for this so we
>>>> >> >>>>> can
>>>> >> >>>>> continue
>>>> >> >>>>> with integrating myfaces 2 in geronimo.  I've
attached a
>>>> >> >>>>> suitable
>>>> >> >>>>> patch to
>>>> >> >>>>>  MYFACES-2290 as
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12428613/allow-ee6-versioned-apis.diff
>>>> >> >>>>> With this patch we can at least start a server
that has loaded
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces 2.
>>>> >> >>>>>  Hopefully soon we'll be able to run the ee6
version of the
>>>> >> >>>>> tck.
>>>> >> >>>>> many thanks
>>>> >> >>>>> david jencks
>>>> >> >>>>> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Ivan,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> we can't use servlet 3.0.0 yet. Not yet final
...
>>>> >> >>>>> and jsf 2.0 has _no_ dependency to it...
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> -Matthias
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Ivan <xhhsld@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Hi, is it possible to update the accepted servlet
spec version
>>>> >> >>>>> to
>>>> >> >>>>> 3.0.0 in
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> the configurations of maven-bundle-plugin?
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks !
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> 2009/11/26 Werner Punz <werner.punz@gmail.com>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> +1
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Hi,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> I was running the needed tasks to get the 2.0.0-alpha
release
>>>> >> >>>>> of
>>>> >> >>>>> Apache
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> MyFaces core out.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Please note that this vote concerns all of
the following parts:
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared"
>>>> >> >>>>> v4.0.1-alpha
>>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.test"
v1.0.0-alpha
>>>> >> >>>>> [1]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  3. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core"
v2.0.0-alpha
>>>> >> >>>>>  [1]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache
account ([1]
>>>> >> >>>>> and [3]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> for binary and source packages).
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> The release notes could be found at [4].
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Also the clirr test does not show binary incompatibilities
with
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> myfaces-api.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Please take a look at the "2.0.0-alpha" artifacts
and vote!
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Please note: This vote is "majority approval"
with a minimum of
>>>> >> >>>>> three
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  +1 votes (see [3]).
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed
the bits
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [ ] +0
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these
bits not to be
>>>> >> >>>>> released,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  and why..............
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks,
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alpha
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>  [4]
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600&styleName=Html&version=12313389
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> --
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Ivan
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> --
>>>> >> >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >> >>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> --
>>>> >> >>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >> >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> --
>>>> >> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Grant Smith
>>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message