On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:51 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:57 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> ant elder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 11:10 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto: >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Simon Laws >>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> <snip> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Re. JMS. I'm a little nervous about putting completely new >>>>>> function out in 1.3.1. <http://1.3.1.> JMS changes that fix >>>>>> deficiencies from 1.3 would be candidates though. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What is it that makes you nervous about adding the JMS changes? >>>>>> There are no "rules" about what should go into a release named 1.x >>>>>> as opposed to 1.x.x so i think its fine to add new function in a >>>>>> 1.x.x style release. If the concern is that it may delay getting >>>>>> some critical fixes released then maybe we just need to coordinate >>>>>> 1.3.1 and 1.3.2 releases? >>>>>> Doing releases based on the previous release tag is relatively easy >>>>>> as demonstrated by the 1.2.1 release. It takes minimal work to do >>>>>> and to review, it makes it easy to document the changes, its an >>>>>> easy >>>>>> way to get new function released, and it can be done by individuals >>>>>> instead of requiring lots of community help. As i just suggested on >>>>>> the "1.3 Washup, release process improvement" this seems like and >>>>>> easy way to RERO given the size of Tuscany these days. >>>>>> >>>>>> ...ant >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll start making the 1.3.1 branch today and merge in and fixes from >>>>>> JIRAs in Java-SCA-1.3.1. The main one outstanding is TUSCANY-2539 if >>>>>> anyone >>>>>> has some time. I'll leave the JMS changes for the time being waiting a >>>>>> little longer to see if there are any reasons why it should not go into >>>>>> 1.3.x. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have completed the fix for TUSCANY-2531 now. This needs to go into >>>>> 1.3.1. The fix passes a full build and I'll check it in later today. >>>>> >>>>> Simon >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> We are down to 3 issues related to 1.3.1. >>>> >>>> TUSCANY-2534 >>>> Ant you made a fix in trunk. Are you going to apply to 1.3.1? >>>> TUSCANY-2514 >>>> Ant you made a fix in trunk. Are you going to apply to 1.3.1? >>>> TUSCANY-2542 >>>> Looks like a stretch for 1.3.1 >>>> >>>> If we can get the first two closed out I think we can spin a release >>>> candidate. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Simon >>>> >>>> >>> Ok, seems like we've accepted there should be a 1.3.1 release now so i'll >>> do these and spin an RC1, i'll try to get that done by late Monday, >>> >>> ...ant >>> >> >> There are some release artifacts for 1.3.1 available for review at >> http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/1.3.1-RC0/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/1.3.1-RC0/>and >> a tag at >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/tags/java/sca/1.3.1-RC0/ >> >> I'll leave this for a day or two to give time for any reviews and look at >> starting an RC1 release vote on say Wednesday. >> >> ...ant >> > > Hi > > I tried a good selection of samples and demos and all is fine on the > command line and in Tomcat. However we haven't solved all of the issues with > WebSphere classloading. It seems that there some scenarios where the change > to remove dependencies on xml-apis, xerces and xalan (TUSCANY-2534) causes > other problems that I'm still investigating. > > Simon > With the additional fix to TUSCANY-2534 in r687572 the WS samples are running fine in WebSphere for me, can you confirm this fixes it for you? The only issue i have left is running the Dave's ejb sample from http://apache.markmail.org/message/rpjlc5iaal6neabj. This mostly doesn't work for me getting a Java class verify error. It seems slightly intermittent as it did work once but usually doesn't, converting the EJB back to use the SCADomain API and it always works fine. I don't think this is a blocker for 1.3.1 ...ant
