I think we are ready to proceed with the release. To port WICKET-6999 I've added osgi configuration also to experimental modules modules for HTTP2:
https://github.com/apache/wicket/commit/3054cb6249dfdc61efa5ded2f419359edf847224 It should be ok, just let me know if I did something wrong. On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 9:16 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> wrote: > PR #540 is ready for review. I completed updates for the wicket modules > that we use and can spot check. > > Note— It would be contract-breaking to ship wicket-9.x w/ slf4j 2.0 > without this change in place, so next up it’d be good to back-port this to > the wicket-9.x branch and get some testing underway. > > Completed: > > wicket-util > wicket-request > wicket-core > wicket-auth-roles > wicket-devutils > wicket-extensions > wicket-jmx > > Not yet updated: > > wicket-bean-validation > wicket-cdi > wicket-guice > wicket-ioc > wicket-native-websocket > wicket-objectsizeof-agent > wicket-spring > wicket-velocity > > Thanks, > Matt > > > On Sep 30, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Update — draft PR here: https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/540 < > https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/540> > > > > This PR works for wicket-util and wicket-request modules right now. > > > > At issue is the use of enforcer plugin to limit configurations > per-execution. maven-bundle-plugin runs at various phases and if there is > not a config for each, the default behavior will execute on the last phase > and we don’t get the version override as configured in the 'instructions'. > I’m working on identifying the last goal that runs and perhaps we can get > away with a single definition for that phase without changing the enforcer > plugin rules. > > > > Thanks, > > Matt > > > >> On Sep 29, 2022, at 2:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com > <mailto:an.delb...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> Thank you Matt! > >> > >> On 29/09/22 16:43, Matt Pavlovich wrote: > >>> I got pulled off onto other tasks. I will have time to get the PR out > this weekend. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Matt Pavlovich > >>> > >>>> On Sep 29, 2022, at 6:19 AM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com > <mailto:an.delb...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I think I've lost track about this activity...what do we still miss to > >>>> proceed with the new release? > >>>> Thank you. > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 6:19 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com > <mailto:mattr...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I can help w/ the OSGi import package. Should just be a simple > override in > >>>>> the bundle plugin config. > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Sep 15, 2022, at 3:00 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com > <mailto:an.delb...@gmail.com>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> I agree with Martijn. Probably the downgrade is the best solution > at the > >>>>> moment. Like Martin suggests it would be nice to investigate how > >>>>> Import-Package for OSGi are generated, but it's not a trivial task > and we > >>>>> need someone with more experience with OSGi > >>>>>> On 14/09/22 09:22, Martijn Dashorst wrote: > >>>>>>> IIUC sfl4j 2.0.0 API is the same as 1.7.x API, so from a Wicket > >>>>> perspective > >>>>>>> it doesn't matter if we ship with 2.0.0 or 1.7.x, right? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If that is the case, I suggest we fall back to 1.7.x, and note > that one > >>>>> can > >>>>>>> easily upgrade to 2.0.0 without issue if someone so desires. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This will keep it working for most folks, yet give an upgrade path > for > >>>>>>> those that wish so. It is harder to convince someone to downgrade > from > >>>>> 2.0 > >>>>>>> to 1.7 than to upgrade to 2.0 from 1.7. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But this is my .02 (which is even worth less with the current > exchange > >>>>>>> rates). > >>>>>> ...😁 > >>>>>>> Martijn > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Andrea Del Bene. > >>>> Apache Wicket committer. > > > > -- Andrea Del Bene. Apache Wicket committer.
