Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin (GEP) 3.0-beta-1 RC2
- download the source code and successfully build with maven2.2 in windows xp 32-bit. - successfully install the gep by p2 way - successfully start/stop server in gep so, my +1 On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 2:11 PM, han hongfang wrote: > my +1 with > > - build pass on ubuntu > - rat check pass > - staging install successfully to indigo SR1 > - start/stop server v3.0-beta-1 successfully > - develop/deploy simple web app successfully > > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 2:09 PM, han hongfang wrote: > >> Hi devs, >> >> Please help to review and vote on the release of Geronimo Eclipse Plugin >> (GEP) 3.0-beta-1 RC2. >> >> GEP 3.0-beta-1 supports Geronimo server 3.0-beta-1, 2.2.1, 2.1.7 and >> Eclipse Indigo (3.7). >> >> [Known issue] >> 1. GEP 3.0-beta-1 uses maven-eclipsepde-plugin v1.1, which means it can >> not be built successfully on 64bit win7 and 64bit macos. See following >> JIRAs for details. >> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-737 Could not >> build GEP3.0 under win7-64bit >> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-674 Could not >> build GEP3.0 under macos-64bit >> 2. Also, please use maven v2.2.1 to build GEP 3.0-beta-1 as following >> JIRA is still open. >> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-694 Can not >> build GEP with maven 3.0 >> >> The source code zip is here: >> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-271/org/apache/geronimo/devtools/geronimo-eclipse-plugin/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-source-release.zip >> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-271/org/apache/geronimo/devtools/geronimo-eclipse-plugin/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-source-release.tar.gz >> >> The tag is here: >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/devtools/eclipse-plugin/tags/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1 >> >> The deployable zip file is here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-deployable.zip >> >> The update site zip file is here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-updatesite.zip >> >> The p2 repo zip file is here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-p2repo.zip >> >> If you would like to review and/or comment on the release notes, you can >> find it here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/updates/PLUGIN_RELEASE-NOTES-3.0-beta-1.txt >> >> Finally, I've created a Staging Site that can be used to test the update >> manager functions of Eclipse (Indigo and helios): >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/updates/ >> >> The vote will be open for the 72-hour minimum. >> >> [ ] +1 about time to push this out the door >> [ ] 0 no opinion >> [ ] -1 not this one (please explain why) >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> >> Han Hong Fang (Janet) >> hanhongfang AT apache.org >> >> > > > -- > Best regards, > > Han Hong Fang (Janet) > hanhongfang AT apache.org > > > -- Best regards! John Xiao
Fwd: [RESULT][IP CLEARANCE] Apache Geronimo 2.2 Dependency Upgrades
FYI Begin forwarded message: > From: Kevan Miller > Subject: [RESULT][IP CLEARANCE] Apache Geronimo 2.2 Dependency Upgrades > Date: December 2, 2011 4:21:35 PM EST > To: gene...@incubator.apache.org > > Our 72 hour window has passed. So, I'm calling this IP CLEARANCE complete. > > Thanks! > > --kevan > > On Nov 29, 2011, at 5:09 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Kevan Miller >> wrote: >>> The Apache Geronimo project has received a contribution which updates a >>> number of Geronimo dependencies and associated code updates. >>> >>> The code contributions have been attached to >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6217 >>> >>> I've committed the IP Clearance form to the Incubator website -- >>> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/geronimo-dependency-upgrades.html >>> >>> The Geronimo community has passed a vote to accept the contribution -- >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/20.mbox/%3c1bc3ab3f-2b25-4ce4-ba7b-5c8b4764e...@gmail.com%3e >>> >>> This stage of the IP clearance process is a 72-hour lazy consensus. Barring >>> a -1, the ip clearance for this contribution will pass in 72 hours. >> >> Yes :-) this process is by lazy consensus. >> >> If anyone sees a problem, please post a -1 to this thread to force a >> formal review and VOTE. Kevan will close this thread by posting a >> RESULT mail no earlier than Friday, December 2, 2011 at 12:00:00 UTC >> [1] (by my reckoning). If you can spare a few cycles, please take a >> look before then. >> >> Robert >> >> [1] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20111202T12 >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >
Re: Accepting proposals regarding early git adoption
Anyone can already use git locally, there are apache mirrors of most svn projects and many project's committers expose a lot of work-in-progress on github (e.g. karaf) See e.g. http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache This is asking for projects that would like to use git instead of svn for their canonical apache repository. While I enthusiastically use git almost all the time including for almost all my geronimo work I think geronimo is too complicated to be a useful guinea pig for git at this point. I think it will take a lot of thought and time to figure out how to divide up the geronimo history into appropriately sized git projects. For instance: - each spec is separately releasable so it's a separate git project. Then we need an aggretator project to build them all at once for convenience. Same for bundles. - the server code was originally under cvs at root and only later moved under server. How will this history make it into git (this is probably solved already but I haven't looked) thanks david jencks On Dec 2, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Jay D. McHugh wrote: > Is the idea for this to abandon SVN and move completely over to git? > > Or is it just to add git as a way for folks to manage their local copies of > the source? > > Jay > > On 11/29/2011 03:22 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: >> Forwarding (with permission), in case there's interest within Geronimo >> community. >> >> --kevan >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Joe Schaefer >>> Subject: Accepting proposals regarding early git adoption >>> Date: November 28, 2011 8:28:17 AM EST >>> To: Apache Infrastructure >>> Reply-To: Joe Schaefer >>> >>> While many of you are aware of the ongoing "experiment/alpha test" >>> with git hosting for CouchDB, you may not be aware of the recent >>> members@ discussion about git @ Apache, the result of which is to >>> solicit proposals here for projects interested in adopting git now, >>> rather than after the testing phase is over. >>> >>> Any such projects you participate in should write a brief and civil >>> proposal as to why we should select you for further git testing. >>> Proposals should include statements of interest in assisting with >>> the git hosting codebase and associated jira issues from named >>> individuals on the project. >>> >>> We'll allow the remainder of the week to collect proposals before >>> deciding on who gets to go next. >>> >>
Re: Fwd: Accepting proposals regarding early git adoption
Is the idea for this to abandon SVN and move completely over to git? Or is it just to add git as a way for folks to manage their local copies of the source? Jay On 11/29/2011 03:22 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: Forwarding (with permission), in case there's interest within Geronimo community. --kevan Begin forwarded message: From: Joe Schaefer Subject: Accepting proposals regarding early git adoption Date: November 28, 2011 8:28:17 AM EST To: Apache Infrastructure Reply-To: Joe Schaefer While many of you are aware of the ongoing "experiment/alpha test" with git hosting for CouchDB, you may not be aware of the recent members@ discussion about git @ Apache, the result of which is to solicit proposals here for projects interested in adopting git now, rather than after the testing phase is over. Any such projects you participate in should write a brief and civil proposal as to why we should select you for further git testing. Proposals should include statements of interest in assisting with the git hosting codebase and associated jira issues from named individuals on the project. We'll allow the remainder of the week to collect proposals before deciding on who gets to go next.
Bean Validation TCK version
Hi all; apologies for the cross-post. For some time in the Apache Bean Validation podling we intentionally lagged to the 1.0.3.GA version of the Bean Validation TCK because it was our understanding that this was the version included in the larger EE TCKs which Geronimo, and now TomEE, must satisfy. This became a real problem with the release of version 1.0.5.GA of the TCK, which addressed a bug in the original RI *and* TCK so severe that it is literally impossible for a given codebase to satisfy the Bean Validation TCK >= 1.0.5.GA and < 1.0.5.GA simultaneously. After releasing bval-0.3-incubating, we voted for forward progress and made our code compatible with the 1.0.5.GA TCK. Recently I raised the issue on the Bean Validation specification development list, and was informed by Emmanuel Bernard that the Bean Validation TCK *has* in fact been updated in Java EE, to version 1.0.6.GA, which our current trunk also passes. [1] Now I'd like to establish a comfort level among our communities that Geronimo and TomEE will be able to use future releases of Apache Bean Validation, for when we release 0.4-incubating (or perhaps 1.0, as a TLP), your projects will not be able to upgrade the BV implementation without also upgrading the corresponding TCK, or (as I am ignorant of the procedures wrt the EE TCK) obtaining an updated version of the EE TCK which in fact contains the updated BV TCK. Thanks for your attention, Matt [1] http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/beanvalidation-dev/2011-December/000103.html
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin (GEP) 3.0-beta-1 RC2
+1 license/notice, rat look good. I did not build (Mac OS problem), but simple test looked good. Thanks Janet! --kevan On Nov 30, 2011, at 1:09 AM, han hongfang wrote: > Hi devs, > > Please help to review and vote on the release of Geronimo Eclipse Plugin > (GEP) 3.0-beta-1 RC2. > > GEP 3.0-beta-1 supports Geronimo server 3.0-beta-1, 2.2.1, 2.1.7 and Eclipse > Indigo (3.7). > > [Known issue] > 1. GEP 3.0-beta-1 uses maven-eclipsepde-plugin v1.1, which means it can not > be built successfully on 64bit win7 and 64bit macos. See following JIRAs for > details. > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-737 Could not build > GEP3.0 under win7-64bit > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-674 Could not build > GEP3.0 under macos-64bit > 2. Also, please use maven v2.2.1 to build GEP 3.0-beta-1 as following JIRA is > still open. > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-694 Can not build > GEP with maven 3.0 > > The source code zip is here: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-271/org/apache/geronimo/devtools/geronimo-eclipse-plugin/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-source-release.zip > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-271/org/apache/geronimo/devtools/geronimo-eclipse-plugin/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-source-release.tar.gz > > The tag is here: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/devtools/eclipse-plugin/tags/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1 > > The deployable zip file is here: > http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-deployable.zip > > The update site zip file is here: > http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-updatesite.zip > > The p2 repo zip file is here: > http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-p2repo.zip > > If you would like to review and/or comment on the release notes, you can find > it here: > http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/updates/PLUGIN_RELEASE-NOTES-3.0-beta-1.txt > > Finally, I've created a Staging Site that can be used to test the update > manager functions of Eclipse (Indigo and helios): > http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/updates/ > > The vote will be open for the 72-hour minimum. > > [ ] +1 about time to push this out the door > [ ] 0 no opinion > [ ] -1 not this one (please explain why) > > -- > Best regards, > > Han Hong Fang (Janet) > hanhongfang AT apache.org >
Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin (GEP) 3.0-beta-1 RC2
Have run the rat:check, there are some xsd files are reported in the schema plugin as no license, after checking those files, seems that there are some old license headers, and should be OK. here is my +1 2011/11/30 han hongfang > my +1 with > > - build pass on ubuntu > - rat check pass > - staging install successfully to indigo SR1 > - start/stop server v3.0-beta-1 successfully > - develop/deploy simple web app successfully > > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 2:09 PM, han hongfang wrote: > >> Hi devs, >> >> Please help to review and vote on the release of Geronimo Eclipse Plugin >> (GEP) 3.0-beta-1 RC2. >> >> GEP 3.0-beta-1 supports Geronimo server 3.0-beta-1, 2.2.1, 2.1.7 and >> Eclipse Indigo (3.7). >> >> [Known issue] >> 1. GEP 3.0-beta-1 uses maven-eclipsepde-plugin v1.1, which means it can >> not be built successfully on 64bit win7 and 64bit macos. See following >> JIRAs for details. >> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-737 Could not >> build GEP3.0 under win7-64bit >> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-674 Could not >> build GEP3.0 under macos-64bit >> 2. Also, please use maven v2.2.1 to build GEP 3.0-beta-1 as following >> JIRA is still open. >> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-694 Can not >> build GEP with maven 3.0 >> >> The source code zip is here: >> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-271/org/apache/geronimo/devtools/geronimo-eclipse-plugin/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-source-release.zip >> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-271/org/apache/geronimo/devtools/geronimo-eclipse-plugin/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-source-release.tar.gz >> >> The tag is here: >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/devtools/eclipse-plugin/tags/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1 >> >> The deployable zip file is here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-deployable.zip >> >> The update site zip file is here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-updatesite.zip >> >> The p2 repo zip file is here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/3.0-beta-1/geronimo-eclipse-plugin-3.0-beta-1-p2repo.zip >> >> If you would like to review and/or comment on the release notes, you can >> find it here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/updates/PLUGIN_RELEASE-NOTES-3.0-beta-1.txt >> >> Finally, I've created a Staging Site that can be used to test the update >> manager functions of Eclipse (Indigo and helios): >> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/eclipse/updates/ >> >> The vote will be open for the 72-hour minimum. >> >> [ ] +1 about time to push this out the door >> [ ] 0 no opinion >> [ ] -1 not this one (please explain why) >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> >> Han Hong Fang (Janet) >> hanhongfang AT apache.org >> >> > > > -- > Best regards, > > Han Hong Fang (Janet) > hanhongfang AT apache.org > > > -- Ivan
