openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin Sutter <kwsut...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: release or not?
Date Tue, 03 Jun 2014 19:29:22 GMT
Sounds good.  I'll reopen OPENJPA-2459, temporarily back out the Java 7
update, and commit.  Still looking for resource to do the full release
cycle...


On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
> I think best is to do next release from frunk with java 6 constraint then
> branch a 2.4.x and re-upgrade trunk to 7.
> Le 2 juin 2014 23:17, "Kevin Sutter" <kwsutter@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > As I look into this a bit, what is the best way to take out the Java 7
> > support from the 2.4.0 release and 2.4.x branch?  Remove it from trunk
> and
> > then cut the release/branch?  Or, cut the release/branch and then revert
> > the Java 7 changes to build with Java 6 again?  Any preference?
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > hum, a part from Mark which is, yes, over loader I guess, dunno anyone
> > else
> > > in OpenJPA project that can help on that area.
> > >
> > > JLouis
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-06-02 17:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > >  >  Let's us know if and how we can help.
> > > >
> > > > Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process?  :-)  That's
> what
> > > > we're short on right now.  We have a few people that have left
> recently
> > > and
> > > > we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way.  So,
> that's
> > > the
> > > > biggest inhibitor.  I know Mark helped out on the last release we did
> > > > (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as
> > > > well...  I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
> > > >
> > > > Kevin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 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 <kwsutter@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > 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 <
> > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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 <kwsutter@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >  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
<
> > > > jeanouii@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 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
<
> > kwsutter@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message