At this point the JMX implementation of that implements the OSGi/JMX spec from the OSGi Enterprise R5 spec is also back in the main aries codebase. http://aries.15396.n3.nabble.com/Moving-JMX-Next-from-the-sandbox-back-into-the-main-trunk-tp4025659p4025671.html
Maybe we can include this in the batch too. BTW when do we think this release train will roughly go? Cheers, David On 23 October 2012 20:01, Holly Cummins <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi David, > > That thought had crossed my mind too. :) > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:47 PM, David Bosschaert > <[email protected]> wrote: > > SPI Fly (which is the RI of the ServiceLoader Mediator spec) is now > > also ready to be released. Would it be possible to make it part of > > this upcoming batch? > > > > Thanks, > > > > David > > > > On 23 October 2012 12:02, Holly Cummins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Shall we get cracking on the 1.0.1 proxy and util releases, so that we > >> make sure they're ready when we do want to a subsystems release? > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 2:27 PM, John W Ross <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> The OSGi Enterprise RI/CT release is scheduled for early November. > Aries > >>> will be the Subsystems RI. The final RI binary will need to be provided > >>> within the next week. My intent is to provide the output of a Hudson > build > >>> with a reference to the revision. This is acceptable to EEG. Ideally, I > >>> would like to delay an official Aries release of Subsystems for the > >>> following reasons. > >>> > >>> (1) We will also need a 1.0.1 release of Util and Proxy, which will > require > >>> some tight coordination due to the shortness of time. > >>> > >>> (2) There are a few things I'd like to add to the implementation in > order > >>> to support the Virgo use case in the first release. > >>> > >>> (3) It would be nice to have a few more users run it through the mill > and > >>> provide feedback in order to mitigate the possibility of catastrophic > >>> defects in the first release. Virgo was a big help but it would be > nice to > >>> have at least one or two more. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> John >
