-> the 0.3 release of bval means changing the bval tck setup
-> the bug of owb 1.1.3 is not tested in TCKs (as a lot of others):
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1224895



- Romain


2012/1/4 David Blevins <[email protected]>

>
> On Jan 4, 2012, at 12:33 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> Any gut feeling on how long releases take in OpenJPA-land?
>
> > 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.
>
> Probably the TCK will be the biggest indicator if we can switch, then
> 2.2.x release time.
>
> Not sure where our SNAPSHOT discussions will end up, but I can see us
> potentially releasing now with prior versions of the SNAPSHOTs then
> beginning another release  in 2-3 weeks as the newer versions come along.
>
> Seems like there's some merit in releasing now and giving people just a
> bit more time to get their releases out the door.
>
>
> -David
>
>
> > ----- 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