last result from my mvn clean install after cleaning out the local maven repo

rm -rf ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/openejb

java.io.FileNotFoundException: http://localhost:8080/test/a-servlet
        at 
sun.net.www.protocol.http.HttpURLConnection.getInputStream(HttpURLConnection.java:1434)
        at java.net.URL.openStream(URL.java:1010)
        at 
org.apache.openejb.arquillian.embedded.EmbeddedTomEEContainerTest.servletIsDeployed(EmbeddedTomEEContainerTest.java:38)

LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message -----
> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 10:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Release time?
> 
>t omee-connector?
> 
> - Romain
> 
> 
> 2012/1/4 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> 
>>  It seems the tomee-connector compiles now, but the build is still a big
>>  mystery to me.
>>  It now downloads
>> 
>>  Downloading:
>> 
> http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/org/apache/openejb/openejb-lite/4.0.0-beta-2-SNAPSHOT/openejb-lite-4.0.0-beta-2-20120104.041102-100-sources.jar
>> 
>>  ???
>> 
>>  Any explanations?
>> 
>>  We should build the whole stuff with | tee mvn.log and grep out all
>>  'Downloading' and revisit them.
>> 
>>  LieGrue,
>>  strub
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
>>  > To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>>  > Cc:
>>  > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 9:37 AM
>>  > Subject: Re: Release time?
>>  >
>>  > +1 to upgrade if it doesn't break TCKs and the release is not far.
>>  >
>>  > - Romain
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > 2012/1/4 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>>  >
>>  >>  if you have the openjpa-maven-plugin-2.2.0-SNAPSHOT, then you 
> most
>>  >>  definitely also have openjpa itself in 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT.
>>  >>
>>  >>  I'm using an internally released version of it in 2 projects, 
> and
>>  >>  OpenJPA-2.2.0-SNAPSHOT is really stable.
>>  >>
>>  >>  So we could also push for shipping an OpenJPA release. I can take 
> over
>>  >>  driving this part (I'm OpenJPA committer).
>>  >>  I found quite a few (personal) show stoppers in openjpa-2.1.x 
> which we
>>  >>  fixed in 2.2.x
>>  >>
>>  >>  If you still like to use openjpa-2.1.x, then just use the
>>  >>  org.codehaus.mojo version of the plugin instead [1]. They are
>>  basically the
>>  >>  same source, I just moved the plugin over to openjpa to make it 
> easier
>>  to
>>  >>  maintain and test with OpenJPA itself.
>>  >>
>>  >>  LieGrue,
>>  >>  strub
>>  >>
>>  >>  [1] http://mojo.codehaus.org/openjpa-maven-plugin/
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  >>  > From: David Blevins <[email protected]>
>>  >>  > To: [email protected]
>>  >>  > Cc:
>>  >>  > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 7:56 AM
>>  >>  > Subject: Re: Release time?
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > On Jan 3, 2012, at 1:52 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  On Jan 3, 2012, at 12:57 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>>  +1
>>  >>  >>>
>>  >>  >>>  Can we use timestamped snapshot as a workaround 
> (for snapshot
>>  > deps, I
>>  >>  > mean)?
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  We could maybe release the code ourselves like Geronimo 
> does from
>>  > time
>>  >>  to
>>  >>  > time.  Just copy it in, update the groupIds and release it.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > Looking at our snapshots we have:
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > - javaee-api  6.0-3-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - cxf  2.5.1-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - owb  1.1.4-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - bval  0.4-incubating-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - karaf-maven-plugin 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - openejb-openwebbeans-jsf  1.1.2-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - org.apache.karaf.tooling.exam.container  3.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - openjpa-maven-plugin  2.2.0-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - openejb-jstl 1.3-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > Some of these will be easy to deal with, but these seem a 
> bit
>>  > trickier:
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > - karaf-maven-plugin 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - org.apache.karaf.tooling.exam.container  3.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  > - openjpa-maven-plugin  2.2.0-SNAPSHOT
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > From a compliance perpective it looks like we're good 
> with the
>>  > following
>>  >>  > previous versions:
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > - cxf  2.5.0
>>  >>  > - owb  1.1.3
>>  >>  > - bval  0.3-incubating (our patched version)
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > We could easily release again in two weeks or so when these 
> things
>>  are
>>  >>  all
>>  >>  > released.  We keep saying we want to release more frequently 
> but we
>>  >>  haven't
>>  >>  > yet done it.  Releasing again when these binaries are out 
> might be a
>>  >>  good way to
>>  >>  > get into that habit.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > Holding our release isn't that appealing and neither is 
> using
>>  >>  > non-reproducable timestamped versions.  Neither are really 
> good
>>  > habits.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > Thoughts?
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > -David
>>  >>  >
>>  >>
>>  >
>> 
>

Reply via email to