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 <[email protected]> > I would say definitely release a new one... > > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>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 <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> 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 <[email protected]>: >> >> > 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 <[email protected] >> > >> >> >> 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 < >> [email protected]> >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> Hey David, >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:32 PM, David Jencks >> >> >>>> <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> +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<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/myfaces200alpha> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> [3] >> >> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces200alphabinsrc<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/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 >> > > > > -- > Grant Smith > >
