Hi, Migration is still pending, waiting for infra:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21908 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21908> regards, François fpa...@apache.org Le 08/06/2021 à 13:56, Richard Zowalla a écrit : > Hi François, > > any updates from INFRA on this? Couldnt find the ticket id anymore, > sry. > > Gruss > Richard > > Am Mittwoch, den 19.05.2021, 09:38 +0200 schrieb Francois Papon: >> Hi, >> >> Yes, we plan to do this just after the migration to git ;) >> >> regards, >> >> François >> fpa...@apache.org >> >> Le 19/05/2021 à 09:09, Zowalla, Richard a écrit : >>> Hi, >>> >>> thanks for your response! I think, that [1] might also affect the >>> hard- >>> coded TLS1.0 in GERONIMO-6792 [2], so the pending patch would be >>> very >>> appreciated. >>> >>> Maybe after the migration to git? ;) >>> >>> Gruss >>> Richard >>> >>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202343 >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6792 >>> >>> Am Samstag, den 01.05.2021, 08:20 +0200 schrieb fpa...@apache.org: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I think I can take a look to the Jira and merge the PRs. >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> >>>> François >>>> fpa...@apache.org >>>> >>>> Le 28/04/2021 à 11:09, Zowalla, Richard a écrit : >>>>> Just to follow up on this thread: >>>>> >>>>> Do we have any plans for moving forward with the mail-related >>>>> patches? >>>>> The hard-coded TLS config in mail is a bit "pain" ;) >>>>> >>>>> Gruss >>>>> Richard >>>>> >>>>> Am Dienstag, den 23.03.2021, 08:50 +0100 schrieb Romain Manni- >>>>> Bucau: >>>>>> Well it can use a singleton but from a factory method. So >>>>>> immediate >>>>>> solution is to add a public static X getInstance();. >>>>>> But as mentionned it means, to keep the pluggability we >>>>>> should >>>>>> target >>>>>> with such a spi, you will enforce all other impl to use such >>>>>> a >>>>>> pattern (you cant' just switch with -D easily since adding is >>>>>> easy >>>>>> but dropping system props is almost impossible). >>>>>> A noarg public constructor is trivial and more natural with >>>>>> resources >>>>>> IMHO - but once again tomee can does all the work to makes it >>>>>> equivalent, just requires to duplicate/wrap the impls of the >>>>>> SPI >>>>>> in >>>>>> tomee codebase which sounds weird to me ("we have an impl but >>>>>> you >>>>>> need to use another one"). >>>>>> >>>>>> On a more personal note I think this pattern is no more >>>>>> relevant >>>>>> and >>>>>> has more pitfalls since you enforce a static instance as soon >>>>>> as >>>>>> the >>>>>> class is loaded whereas it is not needed depending the >>>>>> lifecycle >>>>>> of >>>>>> your main - it is not much but still, I see it as a leak in >>>>>> terms >>>>>> of >>>>>> design (indeed this one is not important and not a blocker >>>>>> but >>>>>> all >>>>>> implies to move to the noarg public constructor on my side). >>>>>> Maybe a habit and personal choice so would be great to have >>>>>> another >>>>>> opinion to move forward :). >>>>>> >>>>>> Le mar. 23 mars 2021 à 08:38, Zowalla, Richard < >>>>>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit : >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think, it is about the configuration flexibility in >>>>>>> tomee's >>>>>>> <resource> definitions, which wouldn't allow the use of a >>>>>>> singleton >>>>>>> instance. Hence, the consuming project would need to >>>>>>> implement >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> interface to make it possible. But I am not that deep as >>>>>>> Romain >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> TomEE codebase, so it is still a guess from my side. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gruss >>>>>>> Richard >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am Montag, den 22.03.2021, 23:14 +0100 schrieb Florent >>>>>>> Guillaume: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can drop the private constructor if you want. >>>>>>>> I'm surprised it's needed though, as the default instance >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>> already >>>>>>>> used by the code if no value is provided for the >>>>>>>> timeProvider >>>>>>>> parameter of TransactionImpl. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Florent >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 5:49 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < >>>>>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi Richard, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I still think SystemCurrentTime should have a public >>>>>>>>> noarg >>>>>>>>> constructor (or just drop the private one) since it >>>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>> enable >>>>>>>>> tomee to fully configure dynamically the tx mgr with >>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>> feature but otherwise +1 to apply them all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | >>>>>>>>> Book >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Le lun. 22 mars 2021 à 17:03, Zowalla, Richard < >>>>>>>>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wanted to raise attention on this again. 6792 would >>>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>> very >>>>>>> nice >>>>>>>>>> as we >>>>>>>>>> should allow TLS/SSL protocol versions for a given >>>>>>>>>> mail >>>>>>> server >>>>>>>>>> instead >>>>>>>>>> of falling back to some hard-coded default. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Gruss >>>>>>>>>> Richard >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, den 24.02.2021, 09:33 +0100 schrieb >>>>>>>>>> Romain >>>>>>> Manni- >>>>>>>>>> Bucau: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK we have a few pending patches to apply/issue >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>> close: >>>>>>>>>>> - [mail] >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6792: >>>>>>>>>> update >>>>>>>>>>> some defaults and config capacity >>>>>>>>>>> - [mail] >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6801 >>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6800 >>>>>>> (setText) >>>>>>>>>>> - [transaction-manager] >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6805 >>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>> enable >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>>> the time evaluator impl >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If someone else can have a review it would be great >>>>>>>>>>> (feel >>>>>>> free >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> apply the patch or I can do it after). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> note: some of the patches are waiting for some >>>>>>>>>>> feedback >>>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>> particular txmgr one, wonder about tomee <resource> >>>>>>>>>>> usage >>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>>>>> need to remove the private constructor of the >>>>>>>>>>> default >>>>>>>>>>> impl >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> enable >>>>>>>>>>> to configure the impl completely. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn >>>>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>>> Book
