> Let's us know if and how we can help. Do you have OpenJPA karma to do the release process? :-) That's what we're short on right now. We have a few people that have left recently and we have a few where their "day job" is getting in the way. So, that's the biggest inhibitor. I know Mark helped out on the last release we did (2.3.0), but I'm hearing that his day job is taking up mucho time as well... I'll dig around and see if we can get somebody to help out.
Kevin On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> wrote: > Looks like a good plan to me. Relevant and perfectly fits what we need (in > TomEE at least) > Let's us know if and how we can help. > > Jean-Louis > > > 2014-05-30 22:34 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <[email protected]>: > > > Yeah, I see your point. Maybe it would be better to have 2.4.x with ASM > 5 > > to support Java 8 and then make trunk (2.5.0) be mainline development for > > JPA 2.1. Let's not worry about the work effort at this point, let's just > > discuss what's the right answer. > > > > Even if we wanted to cut a 2.4.0 release, we'd have to revert the build > > environment from Java 7 back to Java 6 for your needs. Is that right? > Or, > > would the build of OpenJPA with Java 7 be okay? > > > > So, we would end up with... > > > > 2.3.x - ASM 4 with Java 6 (Pre-Java 8 usage) > > 2.4.x - ASM 5 with Java 6 (Useful for TomEE and maybe other OpenJPA > > environments wishing to use Java 8) > > 2.5.0 - ASM 5 with Java 7 (trunk, mainline development for JPA 2.1) > > > > Is this accurate? > > > > Kevin > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hum, not easy then. > > > Creating a 2.3.1 with ASM 5 to support java 8 is quite a significant > > change > > > to just change the latest digit, isn't it? > > > From OpenJPA point of view, it's just a dep update with some minor > > changes > > > as far as I understood, but I would maybe increment the minor digit > > > instead. > > > > > > Anyway, I agree with Romain. We can still fork in order to remain Java > > EE 6 > > > compliant but of course, il would prefer to stick with Apache OpenJPA > > > project. > > > > > > JLouis > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 21:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which > is > > > > mainly > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 > or > > > 3.0, > > > > > > > > The 2.3.x stream is for JPA 2.0 level of functionality as well as > Java > > 6. > > > > Any additional development and maintenance for JPA 2.0 and Java 6 > > should > > > be > > > > targetted for this 2.3.x service stream. > > > > > > > > The 2.4.0 (trunk) stream was meant for JPA 2.1 and Java 7. This is > the > > > > main stream for new development. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO < > > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Side note, we are WebProfile 1.0 (Java EE 6) so we cannot embedded > > Java > > > > EE > > > > > 7 API (because it's checked in the certification tests). > > > > > Would be awesome to have a 2.4.0 still Java EE 6 compliant, which > is > > > > mainly > > > > > a maintenant release and target Java EE 7 (ie. JPA 2.1) for a 2.5.0 > > or > > > > 3.0, > > > > > dunno. > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 17:27 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected] > >: > > > > > > > > > > > We are waiting for the 2.4.0 to support Java 8. > > > > > > That's the only library missing to release (OpenWebBeans, XBean > > have > > > > been > > > > > > released last week). > > > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-05-30 16:58 GMT+02:00 Kevin Sutter <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Romain, > > > > > >> I can't speak for everybody on our dev list, but I don't have > the > > > > cycles > > > > > >> to > > > > > >> create an OpenJPA release just for TomEE. It sounds like we > might > > > > need > > > > > >> more TomEE developers with OpenJPA karma to help out in this > > > regard... > > > > > >> Hint, hint... :-) > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Just curious, which stream are you looking for a release from? > > The > > > > > 2.3.x > > > > > >> service stream, or the 2.4.0 trunk stream? If the latter, then > > you > > > > > >> realize > > > > > >> that this has been moved to require Java 7 in preparation for > JPA > > > 2.1 > > > > > and > > > > > >> the rest of Java EE? Does that matter to you? If you are > looking > > > > for a > > > > > >> 2.3.x release, then I still have two outstanding Infra JIRAs for > > > doing > > > > > the > > > > > >> nightly code and doc builds... > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Sorry that I can't be of more help, but we've had a few OpenJPA > > > > > developers > > > > > >> move onto other "day jobs" and their time on OpenJPA has dropped > > off > > > > > >> considerably... Just too much work for the people left... > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Kevin > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau < > > > > > >> [email protected]> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Hi guys > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > we asked few weeks ago if we could hope a release for tomee > one > > > and > > > > > you > > > > > >> > said us to fork but as we took a bit more time to prepare the > > > > release > > > > > as > > > > > >> > expected I ask again the question hoping something changed: do > > you > > > > > >> think an > > > > > >> > openjpa release is close? > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Our constraints are to let tomee be out in june so openjpa > > release > > > > > >> should > > > > > >> > be on vote next week (+- few days). > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > wdyt? > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau > > > > > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > > > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > > > > > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > > > > -- > Jean-Louis >
