On the EJB EC side of things I haven't heard anything in that regard Le mar. 27 juin 2017 à 14:59, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> a écrit :
> I think there was a new spec paper wording for transaction in EE8. > But I have no information whether there also was any API change? > > Do you as EJB EG member have more information on that? > > txs and LieGrue, > strub > > > > Am 27.06.2017 um 14:55 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: > > > > I agree. If you could fixing the OSGi issues that'd be great. > > > > In addition to OWB, Meecrowave could also benefit from it. > > BTW, if we could check and validate the transaction spec, that'd be > fantastic. > > > > > > Le mar. 27 juin 2017 à 14:38, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> a écrit > : > > txs and ping :D > > > > Nah, seriously, we are in the process of releasing OWB-2.0 _very_ soon. > > OWB already passes the CDI 2.0 TCK! > > > > So it would be really great if you could take a look and help us with > OSGi support! > > It would be awesome if OWB would 'just work' in Karaf and other ASF OSGi > projects! > > > > txs and LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > > Am 27.06.2017 um 14:32 schrieb Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]>: > > > > > > Changing my vote to +1. > > > > > > And feel free to ping me when preparing a release so that I can have a > look at the OSGi stuff. > > > > > > 2017-06-27 14:16 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > > > +1 > > > > > > We should also fix the point John raised. > > > John, you should now have committer rights, could you plz raise a > ticket and commit it? :D > > > > > > @Guillaume, I think we currently only have 2 binding votes (Romain and > me), so any 'help' would be appreciated ;) > > > > > > > > > That reminds we that the osgi module in OWB surely also needs some > proper review. > > > It used to work in 2010 on Equinox, but never used it ever since. > > > So it might be good to check whether it is a.) still needed and b.) > works at all these days ;) > > > > > > txs and LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > > Am 27.06.2017 um 14:03 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < > [email protected]>: > > > > > > > > well ServiceLoader doesn't work in OSGi in general - that's why we > had that old ProviderLocator but this one has the issue to not always be > well shaded making classes duplicated and leadind to issues too. > > > > > > > > I propose we let this vote pass and see if we can do better with > more recent versions of OSGi? Any OSGi guru able to help on it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory > > > > > > > > 2017-06-27 14:00 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <[email protected]>: > > > > I just looked, the implementation of ServiceLoader is different for > SeContainerInitializer and CDIProvider. > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/blob/trunk/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/src/main/java/javax/enterprise/inject/se/SeContainerInitializer.java#L47 > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/blob/trunk/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/src/main/java/javax/enterprise/inject/spi/CDI.java#L54 > > > > > > > > I know the latter does not work on OSGi environments, it relies on > TCCL. > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:38 AM Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Guillaume! > > > > > > > > I totally agree, but does this really block this release? > > > > I just moved over the OSGi setup from jcdi-1.1 and changed the > versions. > > > > Is there any OSGi related bug I did overlook or is the support so > far not enough? > > > > > > > > Would it work for you to get this version out of the door and then > ship some patches which improve OSGi support? > > > > I'd happy to also work on improved OSGi support over at OpenWebBeans. > > > > But that's kind of 'improvement' and not a blocker for a release > again imo, isn't? > > > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > > strub > > > > > > > > > Am 27.06.2017 um 13:29 schrieb Guillaume Nodet <[email protected] > >: > > > > > > > > > > -0 > > > > > > > > > > It would be nice to have all the new specs released in an OSGi > compatible way or not include OSGi support. The current state (OSGi > metadata, but no way to find the provider) is not very satisfying imho. > > > > > > > > > > 2017-06-27 11:16 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing our geronimo-jcdi_2.0 spec > jar in version 1.0 > > > > > This is the API for CDI-2.0. The artifact does pass the CDI TCK > and is binary compatible with the official artifact (signature comparison > passed). > > > > > > > > > > The staging repo is: > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1034/ > > > > > > > > > > The source release and binary is here: > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1034/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/1.0/ > > > > > > > > > > Please VOTE: > > > > > > > > > > [+1] yeah, let's ship it! > > > > > [+0] meh, don't care > > > > > [-1] nope, because ${showstopper} > > > > > > > > > > The VOTE is open for 72h > > > > > > > > > > Here is my own +1 > > > > > > > > > > txs and LieGrue, > > > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > ------------------------ > > > > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ------------------------ > > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > > > >
