Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
I would say definitely release a new one... On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.orgwrote: 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=revisionrevision=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), +
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
Hi Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10. My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we should release as beta or release candidate). MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax responses MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for getProjectStage Commit all pending patches. Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam deprecated property). Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release. regards Leonardo Uribe 2009/12/29 Grant Smith work.gr...@gmail.com I would say definitely release a new one... On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.orgwrote: 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=revisionrevision=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
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
Hi, +1 for a beta release. As far as I know there are just a few more things to do, mostly regarding f:ajax and some other minor issues. I am currently working on MYFACES-2363 - this will be in place soon! Regards, Jakob Korherr 2009/12/29 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com Hi Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10. My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we should release as beta or release candidate). MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax responses MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for getProjectStage Commit all pending patches. Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam deprecated property). Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release. regards Leonardo Uribe 2009/12/29 Grant Smith work.gr...@gmail.com I would say definitely release a new one... On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.orgwrote: 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=revisionrevision=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,
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+1 for a new alpha release. Actually I support everything in the process that allows bugs to be detected early. Though, I haven't seen much MF 2.0 user activity until now (mailing list activity, issues...). We have some catching up to do with Mojarra. /JK 2009/12/29 Jakob Korherr jakob.korh...@gmail.com: Hi, +1 for a beta release. As far as I know there are just a few more things to do, mostly regarding f:ajax and some other minor issues. I am currently working on MYFACES-2363 - this will be in place soon! Regards, Jakob Korherr 2009/12/29 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com Hi Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10. My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we should release as beta or release candidate). MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax responses MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for getProjectStage Commit all pending patches. Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam deprecated property). Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release. regards Leonardo Uribe 2009/12/29 Grant Smith work.gr...@gmail.com I would say definitely release a new one... On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote: 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=revisionrevision=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
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
awesome! thanks Jacob and Leo! On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10. My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we should release as beta or release candidate). MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax responses MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for getProjectStage Commit all pending patches. Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam deprecated property). Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release. regards Leonardo Uribe 2009/12/29 Grant Smith work.gr...@gmail.com I would say definitely release a new one... On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote: 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=revisionrevision=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 :-)
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
Let me get my checkin in before the release. I'll try to do that tomorrow. It's separating the ViewHandlerLanguage strategies into share. This will also mean we'll require a new release of share. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote: awesome! thanks Jacob and Leo! On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Yes, there is a lot of issues solved right now, so I would like to do a release, but right now I'm on vacations until January 10. My personal list of issues to be solved before release a new alpha (maybe we should release as beta or release candidate). MYFACES-2363 ExceptionHandler implementation requires deal with ajax responses MYFACES-2464 Find a way to do not use ELExpressions on jsf.js for getProjectStage Commit all pending patches. Release myfaces-builder-plugin again to include some fixes on component generation for jsf 2.0 (also include @JSFWebConfigParam deprecated property). Jakob is doing a great job fixing ExceptionHandler api, so as soon as these issues are solved I'll start the procedure for another release. regards Leonardo Uribe 2009/12/29 Grant Smith work.gr...@gmail.com I would say definitely release a new one... On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote: 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=revisionrevision=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
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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=revisionrevision=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
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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=revisionrevision=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,
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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=revisionrevision=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),
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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.
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=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),
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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. 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. 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. 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.. 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-2290ashttps://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..
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 $.02..
A profile would not be able to affect this issue, since we need
different osgi metadata in the published jars. We don't care what
myfaces builds against.
So, here's the patch:
Index: impl/pom.xml
===
--- impl/pom.xml(revision 892639)
+++ impl/pom.xml(working copy)
@@ -223,13 +223,13 @@
javax.ejb;resolution:=optional,
javax.el;version=[1.0.0, 3.0.0),
javax.naming,
- javax.persistence;version=[1.0.0,
2.0.0);resolution:=optional,
- javax.portlet;version=[1.0.0,
2.0.0);resolution:=optional,
- javax.servlet;version=[2.5.0, 3.0.0),
- javax.servlet.http;version=[2.5.0, 3.0.0),
- javax.servlet.jsp;version=[2.1.0, 3.0.0),
+ javax.persistence;version=[1.0.0,
2.1);resolution:=optional,
+ javax.portlet;version=[1.0.0,
2.1);resolution:=optional,
+ javax.servlet;version=[2.5.0, 3.1),
+ javax.servlet.http;version=[2.5.0, 3.1),
+ javax.servlet.jsp;version=[2.1.0, 3.1),
javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version=[1.1.2,
2.0.0),
- javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version=[2.1.0, 3.0.0),
+ javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version=[2.1.0, 3.1),
javax.xml.parsers,
org.apache;resolution:=optional,
org.apache.commons.beanutils;version=[1.7.0,
2.0.0),
Index: api/pom.xml
===
--- api/pom.xml (revision 892639)
+++ api/pom.xml (working copy)
@@ -221,12 +221,12 @@
/Export-Package
Import-Package
javax.el;version=[1.0.0, 3.0.0),
- javax.servlet;version=[2.5.0, 3.0.0),
- javax.servlet.http;version=[2.5.0, 3.0.0),
- javax.servlet.jsp;version=[2.1.0, 3.0.0),
+ javax.servlet;version=[2.5.0, 3.1),
+ javax.servlet.http;version=[2.5.0, 3.1),
+ javax.servlet.jsp;version=[2.1.0, 3.1),
javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.core;version=[1.1.2,
2.0.0),
javax.servlet.jsp.jstl.sql;version=[1.1.2, 2.0.0),
- javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version=[2.1.0, 3.0.0),
+ javax.servlet.jsp.tagext;version=[2.1.0, 3.1),
org.apache.commons.logging;version=[1.1.1, 2.0.0),
javax.faces.*;version=${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
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Ivan -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Servlet 3.0 stuff (was Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha)
Hey Ivan, I think that Michael is working on some Servlet 3.0 stuff, or started looking at it. See http://markmail.org/message/ks5hf4j6jwcpc5kb -M 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=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Ivan -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+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=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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/myfaces200alphahttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrchttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Ivan
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
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=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Ivan -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+1 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com 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/myfaces200alphahttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrchttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr jakob.korh...@gmail.com wrote: +1 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com 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=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.orgwrote: +1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr jakob.korh...@gmail.com wrote: +1 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com 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/myfaces200alphahttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrchttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+1 Bruno Aranda wrote: +1 2009/11/25 Cagatay Civici cagatay.civ...@gmail.com: +1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote: +1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr jakob.korh...@gmail.com wrote: +1 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com 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=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [VOTE] release of myfaces core 2.0.0-alpha
+1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Michael Concini mconc...@gmail.com wrote: +1 Bruno Aranda wrote: +1 2009/11/25 Cagatay Civici cagatay.civ...@gmail.com: +1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote: +1 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jakob Korherr jakob.korh...@gmail.com wrote: +1 2009/11/25 Leonardo Uribe lu4...@gmail.com 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/myfaces200alphahttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes [3] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrchttp://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10600styleName=Htmlversion=12313389 -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
