OK added the module in the parent pom. Temporary added -preview to the artifact id.
ArtifactId changed from openwebbeans-cdi11 to openwebbeans-cdi11-preview. Is that ok for everybody? If yes, I'm ready to create binaries and cast a vote. Jean-Louis 2013/11/8 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > PS: if you release 1.2.1 please activate the cdi11 module. Maybe we > should append prealpha to the version but it is needed by batchee and > bval N+1 > Romain Manni-Bucau > Twitter: @rmannibucau > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > 2013/11/8 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > > reviewed it for what i was able to do, some review from > > Gerhard/Mark/Arne would be great too > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > Twitter: @rmannibucau > > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > > > > > 2013/11/7 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: > >> Hey guys, > >> > >> Trying to prepare the release. > >> Was cleaning up JIRA > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20OWB%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC > >> > >> > >> Actually, JIRA are not marked as resolved and the "fix for" attribute is > >> not set. > >> Usually, I'm used to set RESOLVED issues to CLOSED and set the "fix for" > >> field to XXX. > >> Can someone help me to check that list and filter those who are really > >> resolved? > >> > >> Then, I can finish the README from the release notes. > >> > >> Then, creating, publishing and doing the legal stuff is not that long > nor > >> hard. > >> Thanks for your help. > >> > >> Jean-Louis > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 2013/11/7 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > >> > >>> *tested > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau > >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau > >>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> 2013/11/7 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: > >>> > testes the shadown part just one minute ago and seems not as bad as I > >>> > thought so repassing tcks and I'll commit it > >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau > >>> > Twitter: @rmannibucau > >>> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >>> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >>> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > 2013/11/7 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>: > >>> >> If that is a blocking issue, I agree, but why not committing the > fix. > >>> >> You have one, even if not perfect, it works in some cases. > >>> >> > >>> >> If definitely not a good patch, who can help fixing that, that was > my > >>> main > >>> >> purpose. > >>> >> > >>> >> JLouis > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> 2013/11/7 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > >>> >> > >>> >>> sure, go on. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> LieGrue, > >>> >>> strub > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> >________________________________ > >>> >>> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> > >>> >>> >To: [email protected] > >>> >>> >Sent: Wednesday, 6 November 2013, 21:41 > >>> >>> >Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >here are my two sense, cause it does not make sense to always wait > >>> for a > >>> >>> >release or always for a bug to fix. > >>> >>> >We depend on a lot of project, so I would prefer to release more > even > >>> if > >>> >>> we > >>> >>> >identified some bugs we cannot fix at a time but at least we are > able > >>> to > >>> >>> >release more than once a year. > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >So, as nobody objected, I will start OWB release. If OWB-912 is > not > >>> fully > >>> >>> >fixed, we can push a 1.2.2 soon because we have other things to > >>> fix/do. > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >For OpenJPA, if the vote is not launched before Friday, we can > fork > >>> as we > >>> >>> >did in the past and integrate the final release as soon as it gets > >>> out. > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >Any thoughts/objections? > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >JLouis > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >2013/11/6 David Blevins <[email protected]> > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >> On the OPENJPA-2335 note. Alex, Tim, Judah and all the 3ds > guys > >>> on the > >>> >>> >> users@tomee list are saying they'll have to drop Apache TomEE > from > >>> >>> their > >>> >>> >> product unless they get a release. They've been asking since > July. > >>> >>> Seems > >>> >>> >> there cutoff is Friday. > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> Looks like the most pragmatic way to make everyone happy is to > do > >>> two > >>> >>> >> releases. One now and one again when OPENJPA-2335 is fixed and > >>> OpenJPA > >>> >>> >> 2.3.0 is released. Then there's no need to rush. > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> -David > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> On Nov 5, 2013, at 10:59 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > Well, TomEE is mostly blocked by OPENJPA-2335. This is a > >>> regression > >>> >>> >> which is in there since a few months and blows up many of my old > >>> apps > >>> >>> which > >>> >>> >> run fine with openjpa-2.2.2 and lower. I've committed a test > >>> (currently > >>> >>> >> failing of course) to the 2.3.x branch in openjpa. > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > I'm mostly offline this week due to holding talks on W-JAX. > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > LieGrue, > >>> >>> >> > strub > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> ________________________________ > >>> >>> >> >> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> > >>> >>> >> >> To: [email protected] > >>> >>> >> >> Sent: Wednesday, 6 November 2013, 6:49 > >>> >>> >> >> Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> Hey, > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> Still there at least for the moment lol > >>> >>> >> >> Did not get news from Mark on the issue above. We discuss > with > >>> Romain > >>> >>> >> but > >>> >>> >> >> we wanted another feedback. If someone else could have a > look we > >>> >>> could > >>> >>> >> >> start the release today and have binaries for vote today. > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> Thanks a lot > >>> >>> >> >> Jean Louis > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> Le 6 nov. 2013 06:29, "Romain Manni-Bucau" < > >>> [email protected]> a > >>> >>> >> écrit : > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >>> We have a regression (found on tomee list). I proposed a > patch > >>> but > >>> >>> it > >>> >>> >> needs > >>> >>> >> >>> some review (Mark wanted to have a deeper look if I didnt > >>> >>> >> misunderstand). > >>> >>> >> >>> This is clearly blocking ATM :(. > >>> >>> >> >>> Le 6 nov. 2013 04:39, "David Blevins" < > [email protected]> > >>> a > >>> >>> >> écrit : > >>> >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> >> >>>> Jean-Louis fixed the issue and mentioned he would release > >>> today. > >>> >>> But > >>> >>> >> I > >>> >>> >> >>>> also know the "release" of his first baby boy is a few days > >>> overdue > >>> >>> >> :) I > >>> >>> >> >>>> suspect he's suddenly got quite busy. :) > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>> If we don't hear from him tomorrow, I'll plan on jumping > in for > >>> >>> him to > >>> >>> >> >>> get > >>> >>> >> >>>> the release started. > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>> -David > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>> On Nov 4, 2013, at 12:36 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO < > >>> >>> [email protected]> > >>> >>> >> >>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> Hi, > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> Ok lemme at least try this morning. > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> Jean-Louis > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> 2013/11/4 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> We should fix the session destroy issue first. > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> Should be really easy. > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> Anyone likes to take over? > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> I have 3 conf talks to deliver this week, thus my time > is a > >>> bit > >>> >>> >> short > >>> >>> >> >>>> this > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> week... > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> LieGrue, > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> strub > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> To: [email protected] > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Cc: > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 4 November 2013, 8:24 > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Time for 1.2.1? > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Lol > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> I've been discussing with Mark for a while. We were > waiting > >>> some > >>> >>> >> >>> fixes > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> but > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> I should start the release early this week, maybe today > or > >>> so. > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> Le 4 nov. 2013 03:09, "David Blevins" < > >>> [email protected]> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> a écrit : > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> Anyone have any objections if I roll a 1.2.1 release? > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> -David > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>>> -- > >>> >>> >> >>>>> Jean-Louis > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >-- > >>> >>> >Jean-Louis > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> -- > >>> >> Jean-Louis > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jean-Louis > -- Jean-Louis
