openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Aries release
Date Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:06:48 GMT
The beta2 release contains the bundle activator code, but nothing for
OPENJPA-1490, OPENJPA-1491 or OPENJPA-1524.


-Donald


On 2/24/10 9:00 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> So that means you did not include solutions for the 2 JIRAs mentioned
> earlier?
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> Donald Woods wrote:
>> Just put a openjpa-2.0.0-beta2 up for a vote this afternoon, so
>> hopefully it'll be ready in time for your release to use it....
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>>
>> On 2/23/10 4:38 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
>>> I'll be starting a openjpa-2.0.0-beta2 release tomorrow, if that
>>> helps... :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> -Donald
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/19/10 11:06 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
>>>> I'd like to see JPA included, as we've been working on some Aries
>>>> updates over in OpenJPA...
>>>>
>>>> Also, we're starting to discuss cutting a openjpa-2.0.0-beta2, which
>>>> would happen before the end of this month, if that helps to cut your
>>>> release.....  The big changes from the original beta, would be we now
>>>> have a bundle activator and I'm looking at resolving a couple other
>>>> defects Tim opened, along with our builds/runtime now requiring Java
>>>> SE 6.
>>>>
>>>> -Donald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/19/10 3:11 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>> I'd like to see at least those included:
>>>>>   * blueprint
>>>>>   * jmx
>>>>>   * jndi
>>>>>   * transaction
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think applications are really usable yet and I haven't really
>>>>> looked at JPA yet, so can't tell about it.
>>>>> The transaction component is functional and we've been using it mostly
>>>>> unchanged since a long time in ServiceMix.
>>>>> Do you have any particular concerns with it ? (I'm not talking about
>>>>> declarative transactions for blueprint, note).
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 04:19, Joe Bohn <joebohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks for the response (even while on vacation!) ... and for
>>>>>> volunteering
>>>>>> to be the release manager.  Your response helps me get a better
>>>>>> picture of
>>>>>> the plans.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was really just interested in the general objectives and timing
>>>>>> since it
>>>>>> hadn't been discussed yet.  To get the release out in Feb means it
>>>>>> will be
>>>>>> delivered next week.  I'm afraid the hill might be a little too
>>>>>> steep to
>>>>>> climb that quickly but I'm happy to be proven wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The more communication the better.  It's important to get
>>>>>> everybody thinking
>>>>>> and planning along the same lines (or understand quickly if there
>>>>>> are any
>>>>>> differences of opinion).  Knowing that you are thinking of creating
a
>>>>>> release candidate next week means that we should be getting more
>>>>>> restrictive
>>>>>> on new content to avoid any unpleasant surprises.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't have any strong opinions on what should be in or out - but
in
>>>>>> general it doesn't make sense to release things that aren't
>>>>>> functional. At
>>>>>> the moment I'm not sure what those are - but I suspect not all of
the
>>>>>> components are fully functional yet (for example transaction).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Joe, sorry I started setting myself up tuesday but am now
out on
>>>>>>> vacation until monday.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Personally, I think the 0.1 release should serve to get what
we have
>>>>>>> right now in the respectable form the ASF requires. So 'must
haves'
>>>>>>> are to get the build in the right shape to create the distribution
>>>>>>> files that are acceptable to the IPMC. I think each main area
of the
>>>>>>> code deserves at least a README to describe what's possible.
Since
>>>>>>> this is the first release there are likely a few unknowns - w.r.t
>>>>>>> timing I hope/expect to get the release out this in feb. If there
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> particular JIRAs or other issues you feel should be included
please
>>>>>>> say. I'd like to rename the current JIRA version 1.0 to 0.1 and
>>>>>>> target
>>>>>>> issues for 0.1 appropriately and issues not for 0.1 to target
a new
>>>>>>> 0.2 version. WDYT?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18 February 2010 15:39, Joe Bohn <joebohn@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>> Jeremy,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What are your current thoughts and goals regarding the release
and
>>>>>>>> potential
>>>>>>>> target dates?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it would be good if you could summarize your thoughts
in
>>>>>>>> an email
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> perhaps on a page in the wiki that we can keep updated as
we make
>>>>>>>> progress.
>>>>>>>>  Of particular interest would be the content that we would
like
>>>>>>>> to see in
>>>>>>>> the first release (clarifying what we consider "must have"
from
>>>>>>>> "nice to
>>>>>>>> have"), the current status of that content, target dates
for the
>>>>>>>> release,
>>>>>>>> and the process that we plan to use to generate the release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12 February 2010 09:39, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Great, thanks a lot.  Let us know if you need any
help.
>>>>>>>>>> I guess if you take some notes, it would be interesting
to put
>>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>> on the wiki.
>>>>>>>>> Certainly will. It's been a while since I did one and
the
>>>>>>>>> process has
>>>>>>>>> changed quite a bit :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:32, Jeremy Hughes <hughesj@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kevan, thanks. I volunteer to be release manager.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11 February 2010 16:38, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like the consensus is for a release
with all
>>>>>>>>>>>> components at a
>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.1
>>>>>>>>>>>> version number. Best to start with a simple
versioning
>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme, IMO.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I don't view a 0.1 blueprint
release as an issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing the ability to generate an Apache
release is an
>>>>>>>>>>>> important
>>>>>>>>>>>> step
>>>>>>>>>>>> for the community. Would definitely like
to see this happen...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We'll need a release manager. Any volunteers?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --kevan
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> Open Source SOA
>>>>>>>>>> http://fusesource.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message