JFYI:
my colleague implemented the Johnzon polymorphism feature and he will try
to get all TCK tests running

So whats left:
- Johnzon: wait and run release
- BVal: run release
- CXF: 4.0 is already released? So just integration missing?
- OWB: ?
- BatchEE: ?
- OpenJPA: no commits, also OpenJPA doesnt implement all 2.2 features.
Shouldnt we just replace it with EclipseLink as default?


Am So., 2. Apr. 2023 um 17:19 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
[email protected]>:

> Johnzon is already transitioned to Jakarta. The TCK is already set up. Si
> go ahead if you have some time. Il at DevNexus this week but I can
> definitely trigger a release for bval.
>
> Le dim. 2 avr. 2023, 11:11, Thomas Andraschko <[email protected]
> >
> a écrit :
>
> > I can try to help on implemeting johnzon stuff.
> >
> > MyFaces is done, yup. We even pass the TCK the first time since ever
> > propably.
> >
> > bval: maybe you can trigger a release?
> >
> > About OpenJPA: i dont think the work has been started. Propably we should
> > just switch to Eclipse-Link.
> >
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro <[email protected]> schrieb am So., 2. Apr.
> > 2023, 16:51:
> >
> > > I have been doing some other things and haven't been able to move
> > forward.
> > >
> > > CDI is not too far, but we have some disagreement with the spec and the
> > TCK
> > > which are heavily tight to Weld. So it takes time to test, argue and
> get
> > > challenges accepted so we can then work with the spec.
> > >
> > > BVal is close or compliant.
> > > BatchEE, Mark started and I think a lot of things were not compiling.
> And
> > > some modules can't get updated because there is no jakarta equivalent.
> > > MyFaces should be done
> > >
> > > OpenJPA, I'm not sure about the gap
> > > CXF is close to having a 4.x available but it requires some integration
> > > time.
> > >
> > > Johnzon is close, but missing the inheritance/polymorphism part to
> > > implement. It's a gap but the rest has been implemented already.
> > >
> > > On top of my head, this is where we are.
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 3:03 PM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Don't know the current status.
> > > >
> > > > JL filled some challenges for CDI. As far as I can remember, there
> are
> > > > still some things to do for CDI (?) and Johnzon (?).
> > > >
> > > > Don't know the status of BatchEE, though.
> > > >
> > > > Gruß
> > > > Richard
> > > >
> > > > Am Donnerstag, dem 30.03.2023 um 22:21 +0200 schrieb Thomas
> Andraschko:
> > > > > Is there any further progress?
> > > > > Are there depedencies still not ready?
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently im spending time in porting DeltaSpike to EE10.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro <[email protected]> schrieb am Fr., 10.
> > > > > Feb.
> > > > > 2023, 10:33:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry, but I have closed my big PR #1005 regain TomEE 10.x.
> > > > > > It's
> > > > > > getting too big to get reviewed and it looks like a big bang
> > > > > > operation
> > > > > > which is not desired. For TomEE 9.x we had to somehow do it, but
> > > > > > then it
> > > > > > took months to bring the build back to green and the TCK fully
> > > > > > green as
> > > > > > well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For TomEE 10, we can avoid that and move in parallel with baby
> > > > > > steps
> > > > > > without breaking the build for a very long time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Long story short, I have reopened all PRs merged into that big PR
> > > > > > and I'll
> > > > > > ask everyone to check them out, build them and make sure they are
> > > > > > green
> > > > > > before they are merged.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'll proceed the same way myself by pulling from the big PR some
> > > > > > changes
> > > > > > and create smaller PRs that I can test and get into a green
> state.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to