Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 44A291095A for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 20:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 79836 invoked by uid 500); 30 May 2014 20:48:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 79790 invoked by uid 500); 30 May 2014 20:48:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 79780 invoked by uid 99); 30 May 2014 20:48:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 May 2014 20:48:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jeanouii@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.172 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.172] (HELO mail-vc0-f172.google.com) (209.85.220.172) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 May 2014 20:48:22 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id lf12so2547230vcb.31 for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 13:47:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=wimmRpvPJ0NG+2Ehcljb7OlCbVqsA0nN6IHFs4N4XI0=; b=svxClpD+vuE5bU8tnVJbHBDYLcba5z8ZaDz8Ym47ghynzdMwq7MMDEItHwDZ+fw9pv WX+vIZmXnrSuPkZ4oyYEqqKszdgNdwK9j8KXqX6AVSa8uPgQMP6B7XU192/9NyEshNao 6ozqBWDVqtA/yUgx+WV3FPDpKOmQOi/OHCXt3+1qtmw6+4jp+G3jctLwJjax5Cba8Qpy 8Y6OrWIUCNrwvjfPdcAGZeLUA4D2fy8WPktvOnqIRrrP+/ecopWmsoJc4Q8tdtdp/iOk asdrRAyLm0OIpjnYn8ohI+chawH9mdfpk8Hc99u5O9N7Ba5QkxImwURZl4BAhm9RMpzW mM+A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.182.129 with SMTP id ee1mr16431633vec.14.1401482878180; Fri, 30 May 2014 13:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.182.5 with HTTP; Fri, 30 May 2014 13:47:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 22:47:58 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: release or not? From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d5d7e1ce6d704faa42927 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b5d5d7e1ce6d704faa42927 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we need (in TomEE at least) Let's us know if and how we can help. Jean-Louis 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter : > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with ASM 5 > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development for > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's just > discuss what's the right answer. > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right? Or, > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay? > > So, we would end up with... > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage) > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA > environments wishing to use Java 8) > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1) > > Is this accurate? > > Kevin > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > wrote: > > > Hum, not easy then. > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant > change > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it? > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor > changes > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit > > instead. > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java > EE 6 > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA > > project. > > > > JLouis > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter : > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is > > > mainly > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 or > > 3.0, > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as Java > 6. > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6 > should > > be > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream. > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is the > > > main stream for new development. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO < > > jeanouii@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded > Java > > > EE > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests). > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which is > > > mainly > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 > or > > > 3.0, > > > > dunno. > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO : > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8. > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean > have > > > been > > > > > released last week). > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter : > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain, > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have the > > > cycles > > > > >> to > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we might > > > need > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this > > regard... > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-) > > > > >> > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? > The > > > > 2.3.x > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then > you > > > > >> realize > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for JPA > > 2.1 > > > > and > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are looking > > > for a > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for > > doing > > > > the > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds... > > > > >> > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA > > > > developers > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped > off > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left... > > > > >> > > > > >> Kevin > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau < > > > > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi guys > > > > >> > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee one > > and > > > > you > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the > > > release > > > > as > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do > you > > > > >> think an > > > > >> > openjpa release is close? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa > release > > > > >> should > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days). > > > > >> > > > > > >> > wdyt? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jean-Louis > > > -- Jean-Louis --047d7b5d5d7e1ce6d704faa42927--