openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeano...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: release or not?
Date Mon, 02 Jun 2014 20:58:39 GMT
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