Had a longer response but the planet started boarding and now I have to start again on cell :)
Agree with all your removals. Note on Jakarta activation 1.2, we’ll want to eventually switch to Geronimo Activation 1.2 when we get that ready. We need to update the LICENSE and NOTICE files of each dust to add the EPL v2. When I looked at this a few days ago, I also noticed only some of them had the EPL v1, so that should get fixed as well; all our dists have the ecj jar so need the EPL v1. On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:38 PM Jonathan Gallimore < [email protected]> wrote: > Here's the same analysis on TomEE 7.0.6: > > javax.activation: > - lib/activation-1.1.jar > - lib/javaee-api-7.0-1.jar > > javax.xml.stream: > - lib/stax-api-1.0-2.jar > - lib/javaee-api-7.0-1.jar > > javax/xml/ws/EndpointReference.class, javax/xml/ws/WebServiceFeature.class > and javax/xml/ws/wsaddressing/W3CEndpointReference.class: > - lib/openejb-client-7.0.6.jar > - lib/javaee-api-7.0-1.jar > > So I think removing the following is the way to go: > > geronimo-activation_1.1_spec-1.1.jar (covered by > jakarta.activation-1.2.1.jar) > jakarta.activation-api-1.2.1.jar (covered by jakarta.activation-1.2.1.jar) > geronimo-interceptor_1.2_spec-1.0.jar (covered by javaee-api-8.0-2.jar) > geronimo-javamail_1.4_spec-1.7.1.jar (covered by > geronimo-javamail_1.4_mail-1.9.0-alpha-2.jar) > geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec-1.0.jar (covered by javaee-api-8.0-2.jar) > jakarta.xml.soap-api-1.4.1.jar (covered by javaee-api-8.0-2.jar) > > I'll get started, but please do shout if that looks wrong. > > Jon > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:19 PM David Blevins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Sep 12, 2019, at 1:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Also, I'll take a look at openejb-client, but I'm not too sure what do > > with > > > this conflict: > > > > > > javax/xml/ws/EndpointReference.class, > > javax/xml/ws/WebServiceFeature.class > > > and javax/xml/ws/wsaddressing/W3CEndpointReference.class: > > > > > > - javaee-api-8.0-2.jar > > > - openejb-client-8.0.0.jar > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Only suspecting it might have already been there in a past release. > > > > If that's the case, IMO, any conflicts that were there in 7.x, we ignore > > for now. So if this one is status quo, it's fine. > > > > > > -David > > > > > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile
