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 <lu4...@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 <jankeesvanan...@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_jen...@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 <darkar...@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 <mat...@apache.org> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Hey David, >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks >> >>>> <david_jen...@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 <xhh...@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.p...@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
