CDI TCK: Lifecycle container events

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hello guys,

We have 3 issues I identified with lifecycle events in OWB.

1/ lifecycle container events order: we trigger the PBA in the first place.
The spec is very clear with the order and PBA should come after PIP, PIT
and before PB or POM

I am aware of the specialization and the veto problematics. See 2/
I don't see other options than moving the PBA event to the right place. The
spec phrasing, unless I missed something, is quite clear.

https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#initialization_full
and
https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#bean_discovery_steps_full

2/ "for each enabled bean"

The spec says "for each enabled bean". I asked the mailing list, they
mentioned it's when we process the beans. I'm planning to challenge

org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.extensions.lifecycle.processBeanAttributes.specialization.VetoTest

But this is because after veto is called on PBA, the TCK expects
that we re-evaluate the "for each enabled bean" and then fire PBA which
became enabled because C was vetoed.

There is nothing in the spec that mentions the order in which discovered
beans have to be processed. And there is nothing that mentions that we need
to reevaluate the beans after a PBA is a veto() is called on a PBA

3/ We have 3 beans
C extends B extends A
And we have 3 lifecycle observers
public void a(@Observes ProcessBeanAttributes event) {}
public void b(@Observes ProcessBeanAttributes event) {}
public void c(@Observes ProcessBeanAttributes event) {}
The notification order for observer methods within extensions follows the
same ordering rule as defined in Observer ordering for non-extension
observers.

https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#observer_ordering
To my understanding, lifecycle events ordering are similar to "plain"
application events.

https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#observer_resolution
This part mentions container events such as lifecycle events.

The TCK expects a(), b() and c() being invoked only once for the exact
type. In OWB we notify a() 3 times, one for A, then B then C, we notify b()
twice for B and C, and finally we notify c() for C.

If we use A, B and C for an application observer libe
@Dependent
public static class ListObserver {
public void alpha(@Observes List event) {
System.out.println("A:" + event);
}
public void bravo(@Observes List event) {
System.out.println("B:" + event);
}
public void charly(@Observes List event) {
System.out.println("C:" + event);
}
}
Looks like for application events, we do it the right way, but the spec
seems to indicate lifecycle events are no different and we should treat
them consistently.

What do you think?


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

[DISCUSS] CDI Compliance and breaking changes

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hello guys,

I've been spending a couple of days trying to figure out what the spec says
or does not. I also looked at the TCK tests we currently do not pass as
well as what OWB/Weld do in both situations. I've also augmented the TCK
tests to understand and test some other edge cases.

*Important note*: I created a couple of challenges already and PRs to fix
the spec/TCK and I'm happy to create more challenges. Mind that the process
to create challenges is very well defined
https://jakarta.ee/committees/specification/tckprocess/

In essence, a challenge cannot be filed if we don't agree with the spec or
if the spec is stupid, or else. We can only fill a challenge, if the TCK
does not match something in the spec, if it's more restrictive, etc.

<< Good or bad, the spec is as it is now. The past/future does not matter >>

I'm not sure about the history and if the spec evolved in the past and we
did not follow, or if the spec introduced things we did not agree on and
decided to not implement. As of now, we need changes if we want to ever be
compliant.

I'd like to discuss how to handle the breaking changes. I do think if we
claim to implement CDI we must implement it all and correctly.

I'm ok if we have a "compliance" flag if we don't want to break backward
compatibility. But to me, it's a major version and jakarta namespace is
already a huge backward compatibility issue. So for sure it's preferred we
catch up with all breaking changes now and participate in the spec so we
avoid future backward compatibility issues. If we don't do it now, of
course it will be harder to do it later for our users and it means we'll
never be able to claim compliance.

It is obviously not a vote. But I think it's an important discussion.
What do you think?


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1427) Support for dotted bean names with EL

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1427?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1427.
--
Resolution: Fixed

> Support for dotted bean names with EL
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1427
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1427
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: New Feature
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> {color:#067d17}org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.lookup.el.ResolutionByNameTest{color}
>  uses a bean name @Named("magic.golden.fish") and it tests retrieving it with 
> #\{magic.golden.fish}. We need some kind of a hack to support this use case.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1427) Support for dotted bean names with EL

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1427:


 Summary: Support for dotted bean names with EL
 Key: OWB-1427
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1427
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: New Feature
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


{color:#067d17}org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.lookup.el.ResolutionByNameTest{color}
 uses a bean name @Named("magic.golden.fish") and it tests retrieving it with 
#\{magic.golden.fish}. We need some kind of a hack to support this use case.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1424) org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.BuiltinBeanPassivationDependencyTestorg.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1424?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1424.
--
Resolution: Fixed

Challenge accepted and PR accepted so we can safely exclude from the TCK run

> org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.BuiltinBeanPassivationDependencyTestorg.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.BuiltinBeanPassivationDependencyTest
> 
>
> Key: OWB-1424
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1424
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
>  Components: TCK
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/424



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1422) org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.interceptors.definition.InterceptorDefinitionTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1422?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1422.
--
Resolution: Fixed

Challenge accepted and PR accepted so we can safely exclude from the TCK run

> org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.interceptors.definition.InterceptorDefinitionTest
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1422
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1422
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
>  Components: TCK
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/421



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1419) org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.aroundConstruct.ConstructorInterceptionTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1419?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1419.
--
Resolution: Fixed

Challenge accepted and PR accepted so we can safely exclude from the TCK run

> org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.aroundConstruct.ConstructorInterceptionTest
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1419
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1419
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
>  Components: TCK
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> Interceptor ordering issue in TCK. Challenge created
> https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/418



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1420) org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.contract.lifecycleCallback.bindings.LifecycleInterceptorDefinitionTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1420?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1420.
--
Resolution: Fixed

Challenge accepted and PR accepted so we can safely exclude from the TCK run

> org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.contract.lifecycleCallback.bindings.LifecycleInterceptorDefinitionTest
> ---
>
> Key: OWB-1420
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1420
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
>  Components: TCK
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/419



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1421) org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.overriding.InterceptorBindingOverridingTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1421.
--
Resolution: Fixed

Challenge accepted and PR accepted so we can safely exclude from the TCK run

> org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.overriding.InterceptorBindingOverridingTest
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1421
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1421
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
>  Components: TCK
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/420



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1426) Missing bean types for indirectly implemented interfaces

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1426:


 Summary: Missing bean types for indirectly implemented interfaces
 Key: OWB-1426
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1426
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Bug
  Components: Core, TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


The following TCK test is failing in OWB and I think it's a good one from the 
spec point of view.

 
{color:#067d17}org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.definition.bean.BeanDefinitionTest{color}
 

The spec says 
[https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#managed_bean_types]

 
{quote}The unrestricted set of bean types for a managed bean contains the bean 
class, every superclass and all interfaces it implements directly or indirectly.
The resulting set of bean types for a managed bean consists only of [legal bean 
types|https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#legal_bean_types],
 all other types are removed from the set of bean types.
Note the additional restrictions upon bean types of beans with normal scopes 
defined in [Unproxyable bean 
types|https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#unproxyable].
{quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1425) Interceptors not being called on UnmanagedInstance

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1425:


 Summary: Interceptors not being called on UnmanagedInstance
 Key: OWB-1425
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1425
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Bug
  Components: Core, TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


OWB does not interceptors on UnmanagedInstance even though the specification is 
quite clear in that area.

 

https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#biz_method_full
{quote}When the application invokes:
 * a method of a bean via a contextual reference to the bean, as defined in 
[Contextual reference for a 
bean|https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#contextual_reference],

 * a method of a bean via a non-contextual reference to the bean, if the 
instance was created by the container (e.g. using {{InjectionTarget.produce()}} 
or {{{}*UnmanagedInstance.produce()*{}}}, or

 * a method of a bean via a non-contextual reference to the bean, if the 
instance was enhanced with the {{InterceptionFactory}} interface as defined in 
[The {{InterceptionFactory}} 
interface|https://jakarta.ee/specifications/cdi/4.0/jakarta-cdi-spec-4.0.html#interception_factory],
the invocation is treated as a {_}business method invocation{_}.
{quote}
The spec also says
{quote}A method invocation passes through method interceptors and decorators 
if, and only if, it is a business method invocation.
Otherwise, the invocation is treated as a normal Java method call and is not 
intercepted by the container.
{quote}
 

We can't pass the following TCK test 
org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.extensions.beanManager.unmanaged.UnmanagedInstanceTest

 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1424) org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.BuiltinBeanPassivationDependencyTestorg.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1424:


 Summary: 
org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.BuiltinBeanPassivationDependencyTestorg.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.full.context.passivating.dependency.builtin.BuiltinBeanPassivationDependencyTest
 Key: OWB-1424
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1424
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
  Components: TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/424



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Agree with Romain

Good or bad it is there in the spec. We need something to pass the suite
before we can call it done and go final in my opinion.

I'm ok if it requires a flag or if it's in another separated module. But it
has to be there somehow.

Le lun. 30 janv. 2023, 14:48, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> * +1 to drop jetty plugin for now
> * +-0 to shade cdi-api (nobody will consume it anyway)
> * -1 to release to not milestone without being spec compliant - including
> cdi-lite which is part of cdi-core (even if we all disagree), minimum for
> me is to provide an openwebbeans-lite module implementing the cdi extension
> making it supported, +1 to get a 4.0.0-alpha1 if it helps
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le lun. 30 janv. 2023 à 14:43, Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > all sounds good to me
> >
> > Am Mo., 30. Jan. 2023 um 14:41 Uhr schrieb Mark Struberg
> > :
> >
> > > hi folks!
> > >
> > > We are up and running with passing most CDI-4.0 TCK tests.
> > > There are a few areas where we have excluded some tests:
> > >
> > > * CDI-lite. I'll not gonna implement this in OWB as it is purely for
> > > Quarkus and I don't care. It should be straight forward to implement
> the
> > > functionality as  OWB plugin if someone really needs it though.
> > > * Some challenged tests, some unspecified behaviour in some tests. E.g.
> > > they assume a specified order class annotations before method
> annotations
> > > for Interceptors. But the spec *explicitly* says that for Interceptors
> > with
> > > the same @Priority the order is unspecified.
> > > * backward incompatible reversing the default bean-discovery-mode for
> > > empty beans.xmls. I'll not gonna implement this as it also did break
> the
> > > JakartaEE rules alltogether.
> > >
> > >
> > > Things I want to change yet before the release:
> > >
> > > * Decide about the jetty9 plugin. Tbh I'd keep it excluded until
> someone
> > > wants to contribute fixes to it.
> > > * provide a shaded version of the CDI api jar without all the CDI-lite
> > > parts.
> > >
> > >
> > > Wdyt?
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1422) org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.interceptors.definition.InterceptorDefinitionTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1422:


 Summary: 
org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.interceptors.definition.InterceptorDefinitionTest
 Key: OWB-1422
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1422
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
  Components: TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/421



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1421) org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.overriding.InterceptorBindingOverridingTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1421:


 Summary: 
org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.overriding.InterceptorBindingOverridingTest
 Key: OWB-1421
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1421
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
  Components: TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/420



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1420) org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.contract.lifecycleCallback.bindings.LifecycleInterceptorDefinitionTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1420:


 Summary: 
org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.contract.lifecycleCallback.bindings.LifecycleInterceptorDefinitionTest
 Key: OWB-1420
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1420
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
  Components: TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/419



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1419) org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.aroundConstruct.ConstructorInterceptionTest

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1419:


 Summary: 
org.jboss.cdi.tck.interceptors.tests.bindings.aroundConstruct.ConstructorInterceptionTest
 Key: OWB-1419
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1419
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: TCK Challenge
  Components: TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
 Fix For: 4.0.0


Interceptor ordering issue in TCK. Challenge created

https://github.com/jakartaee/cdi-tck/issues/418



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

Re: [DISCUSS] release a new Meecrowave version tomorrow?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Go ahead. Thanks

Le mer. 21 déc. 2022, 14:51, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Ok,
>
> just checked and seems we are good just upgrading the version this time
> so +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 21 déc. 2022 à 14:15, Mark Struberg  a
> écrit :
>
> > +1 it's easy to upgrade CXF but I'd like to get the CVE solved
> officially.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> > > Am 20.12.2022 um 23:35 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré :
> > >
> > > I guess 3.5.5 which includes some CVE fixes.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > Le mar. 20 déc. 2022 à 21:20, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> Hi Mark,
> > >>
> > >> Do you mean 4.0.0 ir 3.5.5?
> > >> Seems not done on master but we need to check deps  chnages before
> > since we
> > >> must exclude most of them in general with cxf heterogeneous tree.
> > >>
> > >> Romain
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Le mar. 20 déc. 2022 à 21:10, Mark Struberg  >
> > a
> > >> écrit :
> > >>
> > >>> I'd like to roll the release for a new Meecrowave version tomorrow
> with
> > >> an
> > >>> updated CXF.
> > >>>
> > >>> You've got about 12h to stop me ;)
> > >>>
> > >>> txs and LieGrue,
> > >>> strub
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Report due but not yet filled?

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hello,

Just noticed while doing Johnzon report that OWB is also due but nothing is
filled in.
Is it ok?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: Tomcat 7.x EOL

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll create a ticket and execute on it

Le ven. 3 juin 2022 à 16:21, Rémy Maucherat  a écrit :

> On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 2:10 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Since Tomcat enhanced InstanceManager I guess we can upgrade and
> decrease a
> > lot the hacks/reflection we used by the past.
> > Only open point on my side is: is it worth having a tomcat integration? I
> > know very few users of that but generally speaking the web integration is
> > really sufficient so do we want to keep it or let tomcat handle it -
> > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/tree/main/modules/owb?
>
> No problem, I'll keep on doing it (just in case someone comes along
> wanting something that depends on cdi). For sure you should
> immediately remove any code that depends on or supports Tomcat 7.
>
> Rémy
>
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
> >
> > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 13:09, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was doing some dependency updates on OpenWebBeans and wanted to do a
> > > release and I noticed we still have Tomcat 7.x in OWB.
> > >
> > > Shouldn't we try to move to the latest javax compatible version (aka
> 9.x)?
> > > Tomcat 7.x is EOL and has many CVEs.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
>

[VOTE RESULT] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Hi all,

Thanks for voting.
4 +1 (3 bindings) from Daniel, Romain, Mark and myself.

The vote passed. I'll proceed.

Jean-Louis

Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 02:24, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
a écrit :

> Hi folks,
>
> I'd like to get your help on the Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27 release.
> The changes are fairly small, essentially it fixes the relocation patterns
> for jakarta compatibility, and it does include a couple of dependency
> upgrades.
>
> Release notes
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/OWB/versions/12351322
>
> Git Tag
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.27
>
> Sources
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.27/
>
> Staging repo
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1081
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Thanks
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Up 

Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 22:28, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> My own +1
>
> Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 08:59, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1
>>
>> Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 02:36, Daniel Dias Dos Santos <
>> daniel.dias.analist...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Tue, May 24, 2022, 21:24 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi folks,
>> > >
>> > > I'd like to get your help on the Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27 release.
>> > > The changes are fairly small, essentially it fixes the relocation
>> > patterns
>> > > for jakarta compatibility, and it does include a couple of dependency
>> > > upgrades.
>> > >
>> > > Release notes
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/OWB/versions/12351322
>> > >
>> > > Git Tag
>> > > https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.27
>> > >
>> > > Sources
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.27/
>> > >
>> > > Staging repo
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1081
>> > >
>> > > Please vote to approve this release:
>> > > [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> > > [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
>> > > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>> > >
>> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks
>> > > --
>> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

My own +1

Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 08:59, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 02:36, Daniel Dias Dos Santos <
> daniel.dias.analist...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, May 24, 2022, 21:24 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > I'd like to get your help on the Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27 release.
> > > The changes are fairly small, essentially it fixes the relocation
> > patterns
> > > for jakarta compatibility, and it does include a couple of dependency
> > > upgrades.
> > >
> > > Release notes
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/OWB/versions/12351322
> > >
> > > Git Tag
> > > https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.27
> > >
> > > Sources
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.27/
> > >
> > > Staging repo
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1081
> > >
> > > Please vote to approve this release:
> > > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > > [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> > > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> > >
> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
> >
>

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1404) Cannot build

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1404.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Not A Problem

This is outside of what we can do.

> Cannot build
> 
>
> Key: OWB-1404
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1404
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: XML Configuration
>Affects Versions: 2.0.26
>Reporter: Hugo
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>
> Cannot build.
> [ERROR] Plugin org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.5 or 
> one of its dependencies could not be resolved: Failed to read artifact 
> descriptor for 
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-remote-resources-plugin:jar:1.5: Could not 
> transfer artifact 
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-remote-resources-plugin:pom:1.5 from/to 
> central (http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2): Failed to transfer file: 
> http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-remote-resources-plugin/1.5/maven-remote-resources-plugin-1.5.pom.
>  Return code is: 501 , ReasonPhrase:HTTPS Required. -> [Help 1]



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hi folks,

I'd like to get your help on the Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.27 release.
The changes are fairly small, essentially it fixes the relocation patterns
for jakarta compatibility, and it does include a couple of dependency
upgrades.

Release notes
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/OWB/versions/12351322

Git Tag
https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.27

Sources
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.27/

Staging repo
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1081

Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
[ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)

This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.

Thanks
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1413) Fix jakarta relocations

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1413?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1413.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Fix jakarta relocations
> ---
>
> Key: OWB-1413
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1413
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Bug
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1413) Fix jakarta relocations

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1413:


 Summary: Fix jakarta relocations
 Key: OWB-1413
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1413
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

Re: Tomcat 7.x EOL

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

I don't think they do much with it either to be honest.
If we keep it, I would upgrade Tomcat in OWB.
If we yank the integration because it's not used anyways, I'm ok with it.

Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 14:10, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
> Since Tomcat enhanced InstanceManager I guess we can upgrade and decrease a
> lot the hacks/reflection we used by the past.
> Only open point on my side is: is it worth having a tomcat integration? I
> know very few users of that but generally speaking the web integration is
> really sufficient so do we want to keep it or let tomcat handle it -
> https://github.com/apache/tomcat/tree/main/modules/owb?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 13:09, Jean-Louis Monteiro  >
> a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was doing some dependency updates on OpenWebBeans and wanted to do a
> > release and I noticed we still have Tomcat 7.x in OWB.
> >
> > Shouldn't we try to move to the latest javax compatible version (aka
> 9.x)?
> > Tomcat 7.x is EOL and has many CVEs.
> >
> > What do you think?
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1407) Apache Commons Validator 1.4.1

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1407?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1407.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Apache Commons Validator 1.4.1
> --
>
> Key: OWB-1407
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1407
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>  Components: Samples  Documentation
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1410) SLF 1.7.36

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1410?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1410.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> SLF 1.7.36
> --
>
> Key: OWB-1410
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1410
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1411) Apache Tomcat 10.0.21

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1411?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1411.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Apache Tomcat 10.0.21
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1411
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1411
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>  Components: TCK
>    Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1412) Geronimo interceptor_1.2_spec 1.2

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1412?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1412.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Geronimo interceptor_1.2_spec 1.2
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1412
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1412
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1409) Groovy 3.0.10

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1409?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1409.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Groovy 3.0.10
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1409
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1409
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1408) Gradle 3.5.1

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1408?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1408.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Gradle 3.5.1
> 
>
> Key: OWB-1408
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1408
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1405) Apache Tomcat 7.0.109

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1405.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> Apache Tomcat 7.0.109
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1405
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1406) XBean 4.21

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1406?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1406.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.27
   Resolution: Fixed

> XBean 4.21
> --
>
> Key: OWB-1406
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1406
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.27
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1412) Geronimo interceptor_1.2_spec 1.2

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1412:


 Summary: Geronimo interceptor_1.2_spec 1.2
 Key: OWB-1412
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1412
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1411) Apache Tomcat 10.0.21

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1411:


 Summary: Apache Tomcat 10.0.21
 Key: OWB-1411
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1411
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
  Components: TCK
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1410) SLF 1.7.36

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1410:


 Summary: SLF 1.7.36
 Key: OWB-1410
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1410
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1409) Groovy 3.0.10

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1409:


 Summary: Groovy 3.0.10
 Key: OWB-1409
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1409
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1408) Gradle 3.5.1

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1408:


 Summary: Gradle 3.5.1
 Key: OWB-1408
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1408
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1407) Apache Commons Validator 1.4.1

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1407:


 Summary: Apache Commons Validator 1.4.1
 Key: OWB-1407
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1407
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
  Components: Samples  Documentation
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1406) XBean 4.21

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1406:


 Summary: XBean 4.21
 Key: OWB-1406
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1406
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1405) Apache Tomcat 7.0.109

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1405:


 Summary: Apache Tomcat 7.0.109
 Key: OWB-1405
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1405
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

Tomcat 7.x EOL

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hi,

I was doing some dependency updates on OpenWebBeans and wanted to do a
release and I noticed we still have Tomcat 7.x in OWB.

Shouldn't we try to move to the latest javax compatible version (aka 9.x)?
Tomcat 7.x is EOL and has many CVEs.

What do you think?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.26

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le lun. 7 févr. 2022 à 22:06, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 06.02.2022 um 15:30 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > My own +1, we still miss one binding to close this vote guys
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
> >
> > Le jeu. 3 févr. 2022 à 10:33, Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Am Do., 3. Feb. 2022 um 10:24 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Here is the vote for Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.26.
> >>>
> >>> Here is the changelog:
> >>>
> >>> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1401
> >>>  Make interceptor
> >> injected
> >>> method array sorted to be deterministic in proxy classes
> >>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> <
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> 
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>> [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1402
> >>>  CDI iterated
> >>> Instance#select broken  >
> >>> Romain
> >>> Manni-Bucau
> >>> <
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> 
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>>
> >>> Tag (note: uses a http repo for the tck so ensure to build with maven <
> >> 3.8
> >>> or enable http mirrors with maven):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=openwebbeans.git;a=commit;h=0f06ed15bfe3e53923971188e96ecc721242c2e0
> >>> Staging:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1079/
> >>> Dist: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
> >>> My key is the same than last time.
> >>>
> >>> Please vote
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1
> >>> [ ] -1 ${cause}
> >>>
> >>> Vote will be opened for 3 days as usual or until we get enough binding
> >>> votes.
> >>>
> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >>>  | Old Blog
> >>>  | Github <
> >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >>> LinkedIn  | Book
> >>> <
> >>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> 
> >>>
> >>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Meecrowave-1.2.13

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le mer. 15 déc. 2021 à 08:33, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 14 déc. 2021 à 23:32, Mark Struberg  a
> écrit :
>
> > Good evening!
> >
> > I'd like to call a VOTE on Releasing Apache Meecrowave 1.2.13.
> >
> > The following tickets got resolved:
> > Bug
> >
> > [MEECROWAVE-304 ]
> -
> > upgrade to log4j2 2.16.0
> > Task
> >
> > [MEECROWAVE-261 ]
> -
> > upgrade to java16 ready versions
> > [MEECROWAVE-300 ]
> -
> > Upgrade to johnzon 1.2.14
> > [MEECROWAVE-301 ]
> -
> > Upgrade to tomcat 9.0.54
> > [MEECROWAVE-302 ]
> -
> > Upgrade to cxf 3.4.5
> > [MEECROWAVE-303 ]
> -
> > [jpa] extension can leak closed entity managers
> > [MEECROWAVE-305 ]
> -
> > upgrade various dependencies to latest versions
> > [MEECROWAVE-306 ]
> -
> > Update to OpenWebBeans-2.0.25
> >
> > Note that this release requires OWB-2.0.25 which is available in the
> > staging repo as posted in the other VOTE thread.
> >
> >
> > The staging repo can be found at:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1078/
> > <
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1078/
> > >
> >
> > The source release is available at
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1078/org/apache/meecrowave/meecrowave/1.2.13/
> > <
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1078/org/apache/meecrowave/meecrowave/1.2.13/
> > >
> >
> > sha1 is 4619a441a8bce34e55cc2d99281089667d9d7b26
> >
> >
> > Please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] let's ship it!
> > [+0] meh, don't care
> > [-1] gnah, there is a ${showstopper}
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.25 - take 2

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le mer. 15 déc. 2021 à 08:33, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 14 déc. 2021 à 23:24, Mark Struberg  a
> écrit :
>
> > Hi lords and ladies!
> >
> > I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.25.
> >
> > The following tickets have been resolved:
> > Bug
> >
> > [OWB-1393 ] - OWB stops
> > firing ProcessObserverMethods event, when Extension with non system event
> > observer exists
> > [OWB-1395 ] - Jar not
> > scanned after 2.0.24 upgrade
> > [OWB-1397 ] - @Scope
> > scopes are NOT Bean defining annotations!
> > [OWB-1398 ] - Scanner
> > doesnt filter JARs by exclusions in all cases
> > Task
> >
> > [OWB-1396 ] - upgrade to
> > log4j2 2.16.0
> >
> >
> > The staging repo is
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1077
> > <
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1077
> > >
> >
> > The source jar can be found here:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1077/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.25/
> > <
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1077/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.25/
> > >
> >
> > sha1 is 3136dd1f8515487c6c8d88e77bdaca7c6066680d
> >
> >
> > Please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] let's ship it!
> > [+0] meh, don't care
> > [-1] gnah, there is a ${showstopper}
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Regression in 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Great, thank you

Le jeu. 9 déc. 2021 à 11:42, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hi JL,
>
> The scanning was affected - so I guess TomEE does not have the issue.
> Long story short when we were trying to match a beans.xml jar source in the
> classpath we were not dropping META-INF/beans.xml from the name so not
> matching (for folders only, not for jar, probably why we didn't notice it).
> Means for OWB end users that their jars are not deployed as expected
> (missing beans).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le jeu. 9 déc. 2021 à 11:38, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > Hey Romain,
> >
> > The ticket is quite empty and I'm not sure about the description.
> > Do you mind elaborating a bit on the regression and when it happens?
> >
> > I was planning to trigger an Apache TomEE release, so I'm seeking to
> > understand if I should wait until 2.0.25 or if 2.0.24 is fine.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Le mer. 8 déc. 2021 à 19:24, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1395 for the tracking
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mer. 8 déc. 2021 à 19:10, Romain Manni-Bucau  >
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I found a regression in 2.0.24 where some jar can not be scanned.
> > > > I will push a fix now but think it can be serious enough to need
> > another
> > > > release, not sure why we didn't hit it before.
> > > > Don't hesitate to review in 1h or so.
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Regression in 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Hey Romain,

The ticket is quite empty and I'm not sure about the description.
Do you mind elaborating a bit on the regression and when it happens?

I was planning to trigger an Apache TomEE release, so I'm seeking to
understand if I should wait until 2.0.25 or if 2.0.24 is fine.

Thanks

Le mer. 8 déc. 2021 à 19:24, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1395 for the tracking
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 8 déc. 2021 à 19:10, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I found a regression in 2.0.24 where some jar can not be scanned.
> > I will push a fix now but think it can be serious enough to need another
> > release, not sure why we didn't hit it before.
> > Don't hesitate to review in 1h or so.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github
> >  | LinkedIn
> >  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

[RESULT][VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Vote passes with 5 +1 and no other vote

Daniel, Reinhard (binding), Jonathan, Romain (binding), Jean-Louis (binding)

Thanks everyone, I'll proceed with the remaining tasks

Le mer. 24 nov. 2021 à 14:43, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
a écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24.
>
> Here is the changelog:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310844=12350263
>
> Staging repo:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1074
>
> Source zip:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
>
> Tag:
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.24
>
> Dist (dev): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
>
> Please VOTE:
>
> [+1] small but worth it
> [-1] don't, ${blocker}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h or until we get enough binding votes.
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

My own +1

I'll close the vote in a moment.

Le mar. 7 déc. 2021 à 11:40, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hmm, seems I didn't vote - or missed it - so +1 (and with your own +1 it
> looks sufficient)
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 7 déc. 2021 à 11:03, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > The vote has been open for 13 days now.
> > Can't close it because there aren't enough binding votes.
> >
> >
> >
> > Le mer. 1 déc. 2021 à 10:56, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > I've checked licence headers on the source files, and checked the
> LICENSE
> > > and NOTICE files in the distribution. Additionally, I did run the
> tests.
> > I
> > > also encounter the test failure here:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1394 - although it
> > consistently
> > > seems to work for me with a debugger attached. I don't think its a
> > blocker
> > > to release.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 1:43 PM Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24.
> > > >
> > > > Here is the changelog:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310844=12350263
> > > >
> > > > Staging repo:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1074
> > > >
> > > > Source zip:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
> > > >
> > > > Tag:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.24
> > > >
> > > > Dist (dev): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
> > > >
> > > > Please VOTE:
> > > >
> > > > [+1] small but worth it
> > > > [-1] don't, ${blocker}
> > > >
> > > > The VOTE is open for 72h or until we get enough binding votes.
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

The vote has been open for 13 days now.
Can't close it because there aren't enough binding votes.



Le mer. 1 déc. 2021 à 10:56, Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> +1.
>
> I've checked licence headers on the source files, and checked the LICENSE
> and NOTICE files in the distribution. Additionally, I did run the tests. I
> also encounter the test failure here:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1394 - although it consistently
> seems to work for me with a debugger attached. I don't think its a blocker
> to release.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jon
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 1:43 PM Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24.
> >
> > Here is the changelog:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310844=12350263
> >
> > Staging repo:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1074
> >
> > Source zip:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
> >
> > Tag:
> > https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.24
> >
> > Dist (dev): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
> >
> > Please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] small but worth it
> > [-1] don't, ${blocker}
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h or until we get enough binding votes.
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

gt; > I built several times locally and didn't reproduced it, wonder if
> > > > > it is a
> > > > > flacky issue so if it is new or not :s
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le jeu. 25 nov. 2021 à 16:09, Zowalla, Richard <
> > > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Looks like CI also have the issue:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/OpenWebBeans/job/OpenWebBeans-trunk-deploy/org.apache.openwebbeans$openwebbeans-impl/50/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/OpenWebBeans/job/OpenWebBeans-trunk/org.apache.openwebbeans$openwebbeans-impl/49/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gruss
> > > > > > Richard
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am Donnerstag, dem 25.11.2021 um 16:04 +0100 schrieb Jean-Louis
> > > > > > MONTEIRO:
> > > > > > > Is someone else having the same issue?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le jeu. 25 nov. 2021 à 16:03, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > > > > > jeano...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'll fix the dist area with the right zip. Sorry, I grabbed
> > > > > > > > it from
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > Maven Nexus Repo, but probably messed it up.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I ran the build just now
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [INFO]
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] Reactor Summary for Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.25-
> > > > > > > > > SNAPSHOT:
> > > > > > > > > [INFO]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] Apache OpenWebBeans 
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 3.181 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] SPI definition .
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 1.726 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] OpenWebBeans Core ..
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 23.984 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] EE Common plugin ...
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 0.641 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] EL 2.2 plugin ..
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 1.848 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] Web plugin .
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 2.486 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] EJB plugin .
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 0.589 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] Java EE plugin .
> > > > > > > > > SUCCESS [
> > > > > > > > > 0.635 s]
> > > > > > > > > [INFO] Tomcat 7 plugin 
> > > > > > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Is someone else having the same issue?

Le jeu. 25 nov. 2021 à 16:03, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> I'll fix the dist area with the right zip. Sorry, I grabbed it from the
> Maven Nexus Repo, but probably messed it up.
>
> I ran the build just now
>
> [INFO]
>> 
>> [INFO] Reactor Summary for Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.25-SNAPSHOT:
>> [INFO]
>> [INFO] Apache OpenWebBeans  SUCCESS [
>>  3.181 s]
>> [INFO] SPI definition . SUCCESS [
>>  1.726 s]
>> [INFO] OpenWebBeans Core .. SUCCESS [
>> 23.984 s]
>> [INFO] EE Common plugin ... SUCCESS [
>>  0.641 s]
>> [INFO] EL 2.2 plugin .. SUCCESS [
>>  1.848 s]
>> [INFO] Web plugin . SUCCESS [
>>  2.486 s]
>> [INFO] EJB plugin . SUCCESS [
>>  0.589 s]
>> [INFO] Java EE plugin . SUCCESS [
>>  0.635 s]
>> [INFO] Tomcat 7 plugin  SUCCESS [
>>  3.982 s]
>> [INFO] Jetty 9 plugin . SUCCESS [
>>  4.323 s]
>> [INFO] JMS plugin . SUCCESS [
>>  0.531 s]
>> [INFO] JSF-2 plugin ... SUCCESS [
>>  1.214 s]
>> [INFO] EE Resource plugin . SUCCESS [
>>  0.625 s]
>> [INFO] OSGi plugin  SUCCESS [
>>  0.554 s]
>> [INFO] TCK Porting Pkg  SUCCESS [
>>  0.552 s]
>> [INFO] OWB Arquillian Parent .. SUCCESS [
>>  0.327 s]
>> [INFO] OpenWebBeans-Standalone Arquillian connector ... SUCCESS [
>>  2.664 s]
>> [INFO] OWB Samples  SUCCESS [
>>  0.190 s]
>> [INFO] Sample Guess Application ... SUCCESS [
>>  1.546 s]
>> [INFO] JSF Conversation Sample  SUCCESS [
>>  1.067 s]
>> [INFO] Sample JSF2 Application  SUCCESS [
>>  1.148 s]
>> [INFO] Sample Hotel Reservation Application ... SUCCESS [
>>  2.707 s]
>> [INFO] Tomcat 7 Sample  SUCCESS [
>>  0.368 s]
>> [INFO] OpenWebBeans Java SE Sample  SUCCESS [
>>  0.903 s]
>> [INFO] OWB JSR-330 TCK  SUCCESS [
>>  1.149 s]
>> [INFO] JSR-365 TCK runner . SUCCESS [
>> 37.031 s]
>> [INFO] CDI TCK runner (Jakarta) ... SUCCESS [
>> 37.805 s]
>> [INFO] Distribution Pkg ... SUCCESS [
>>  0.592 s]
>> [INFO] Gradle ShadowJar Plugin Integration  SUCCESS [
>>  0.489 s]
>> [INFO] Apache OpenWebBeans CDI Java SE Implementation . SUCCESS [
>>  2.155 s]
>> [INFO] OpenWebBeans JUnit5  SUCCESS [
>>  3.847 s]
>> [INFO] Slf4j Integration .. SUCCESS [
>>  1.107 s]
>> [INFO] BOM  SUCCESS [
>>  0.140 s]
>> [INFO] SE BOM . SUCCESS [
>>  0.239 s]
>> [INFO] Web BOM  SUCCESS [
>>  0.214 s]
>> [INFO]
>> 
>> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
>> [INFO]
>> 
>> [INFO] Total time:  02:22 min
>> [INFO] Finished at: 2021-11-25T15:47:04+01:00
>> [INFO]
>> 
>>
>
> And my Java version
>
> $ mvn -version
>> Apache Maven 3.6.3 (cecedd343002696d0abb50b32b541b8a6ba2883f)
>> Maven home: /Users/jlmonteiro/Library/apache-maven-3.6.3
>> Java version: 1.8.0_281, vendor: Oracle Corporation, runtime:
>> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_281.jdk/Contents/Home/jre
>> Default locale: fr_FR, platform encoding: UTF-8
>> OS name: "mac os x", version: "10.16", arch: "x86_64", family: "mac"
>>
>
>
> Le jeu. 25 nov. 2021 à 15:25, Reinhard Sandtner <
> reinhard.sandt...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Hey again,
>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

//repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1074/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.24/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
> ,
> > can be fixed after the release when doing the dist.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
> >
> > Le jeu. 25 nov. 2021 à 09:51, Reinhard Sandtner <
> reinhard.sandt...@gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> >> hey,
> >>
> >> sorry but i am not able to unzip the src zip
> >>
> >> file openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
> >> openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip: ASCII text
> >>
> >> and the sha512 is also not correct.
> >>
> >> lg
> >> reini
> >>
> >>> Am 24.11.2021 um 14:43 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> >> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
> >> <
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip
> >>>
> >>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

[VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hi all,

I'd like to release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.24.

Here is the changelog:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310844=12350263

Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1074

Source zip:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/openwebbeans-2.0.24-source-release.zip

Tag:
https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/tree/openwebbeans-2.0.24

Dist (dev): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/

Please VOTE:

[+1] small but worth it
[-1] don't, ${blocker}

The VOTE is open for 72h or until we get enough binding votes.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

[jira] [Updated] (OWB-1074) implement automatic supportsConversation() detection

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1074?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro updated OWB-1074:
-
Fix Version/s: 2.0.25
   (was: 2.0.24)

> implement automatic supportsConversation() detection
> 
>
> Key: OWB-1074
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1074
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: Context and Scopes
>Affects Versions: 1.5.0
>Reporter: Mark Struberg
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.25
>
>
> Currently we rely on the user to define the configuration option in 
> OpenWebBeansConfiguration
> {code}
> APPLICATION_SUPPORTS_CONVERSATION = 
> "org.apache.webbeans.application.supportsConversation";
> {code}
> This is by default disabled in owb-impl (core) and gets enabled by adding the 
> web or jsf plugins.
> We could improve this by not only allowing {{true}} or {{false}} but also 
> with an {{auto}} mode. 
> In this mode the BeanManager can walk through all registered beans and check 
> whether there is a single @ConversationScoped bean. In that case we will 
> automagically enable CDI conversations, otherwise OWB will dynamically 
> disable conversation support and don't need to do all kinds of work in 
> WebContextsService for example.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

[jira] [Updated] (OWB-1282) Reduce reflection usage for default services in WebBeansContext

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1282?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro updated OWB-1282:
-
Fix Version/s: 2.0.25
   (was: 2.0.24)

> Reduce reflection usage for default services in WebBeansContext
> ---
>
> Key: OWB-1282
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1282
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Romain Manni-Bucau
>Assignee: Mark Struberg
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.25
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

[jira] [Updated] (OWB-1078) create Dockerfiles for installing OpenWebBeans as Docker Image based on Tomcat8

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1078?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro updated OWB-1078:
-
Fix Version/s: 2.0.25
   (was: 2.0.24)

> create Dockerfiles for installing OpenWebBeans as Docker Image based on 
> Tomcat8
> ---
>
> Key: OWB-1078
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1078
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: New Feature
>  Components: Samples  Documentation
>Affects Versions: 1.5.0
>Reporter: Mark Struberg
>Assignee: Mark Struberg
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.25
>
>
> create Dockerfiles for installing OpenWebBeans as Docker Image based on 
> Tomcat8



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

[jira] [Updated] (OWB-1088) fix samples with java 8 and update to tomcat7/8

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro updated OWB-1088:
-
Fix Version/s: 2.0.25
   (was: 2.0.24)

> fix samples with java 8 and update to tomcat7/8
> ---
>
> Key: OWB-1088
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1088
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Task
>  Components: Samples  Documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.0.0
>Reporter: Reinhard Sandtner
>Assignee: Reinhard Sandtner
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.25
>
>
> some of our samples are currently broken under java 8



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

Re: OWB-1393

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Thanks Romain, I'll proceed with a release then

Le mer. 24 nov. 2021 à 08:47, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> since TomEE is blocked since some weeks due to this issue and I didn't get
> much feedback I went ahead and pushed the proposed patch, feel free to
> review/comment if there is any issue.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le ven. 15 oct. 2021 à 11:27, Arne Limburg 
> a écrit :
>
> > Hi Romain,
> >
> > now I understand your point and it sounds valid. I can take a deeper look
> > into it this weekend, but feel free to change it by yourself,  if you
> want.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arne
> >
> > OPEN KNOWLEDGE GmbH
> > Poststraße 1, 26122 Oldenburg
> > Mobil: +49 151 - 108 22 942
> > Tel: +49 441 - 4082-154
> > Fax: +49 441 - 4082-111
> > arne.limb...@openknowledge.de
> > www.openknowledge.de<
> >
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.openknowledge.de%2F=04%7C01%7C%7C3004d8758be44c8678c008d93bcc1e23%7C48837bc476f9481d8a76bd7b60b43dec%7C0%7C0%7C637606570139932909%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=9vRVYZVZ%2Feqk%2BvFxU5COofNvgs8U0AxtxRqwVEwqXHA%3D=0
> > >
> > Registergericht: Amtsgericht Oldenburg, HRB 4670
> > Geschäftsführer: Lars Röwekamp, Jens Schumann
> >
> > Treffen Sie uns auf kommenden Konferenzen und Workshops:
> > Zu unseren Events<
> >
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.openknowledge.de%2Fevent%2F=04%7C01%7C%7C3004d8758be44c8678c008d93bcc1e23%7C48837bc476f9481d8a76bd7b60b43dec%7C0%7C0%7C637606570139932909%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=8tjmukdm1NxhXQMkn4VnESiBI216kXvh%2Fjb7%2FFYI0kE%3D=0
> > >
> >
> > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
> > Datum: Montag, 11. Oktober 2021 um 20:51
> > An: openwebbeans-dev 
> > Betreff: Re: OWB-1393
> > Le lun. 11 oct. 2021 à 20:13, Arne Limburg <
> arne.limb...@openknowledge.de>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi Romain,
> > >
> > > The cache in question explicitly caches extensions per lifecycle event,
> > so
> > > a check for isContainerEvent would not helb. We could completely
> disable
> > > that cache, but I’m afraid, that would decrease startup performance
> even
> > > more. I guess, it is good to know, which extension observes
> > > ProcessAnnotatedType events and which doesn’t.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, please don't disable that cache which helps to startup faster when
> > using extensions with several beans.
> > Point was more:
> >
> > for (method: methods) { if (is container) {} }
> > for (method: methods) { if (!is container) {} }
> >
> > versus
> >
> > for (method: filter(methods)) { if (!is container) { } else { define();
> } }
> >
> > Know it is only #extensions x #methods so likely not crazy but sounds
> more
> > natural to prepare the runtime in one pass for this no?
> > Concretely it would be something like
> > https://gist.github.com/rmannibucau/c0e9f4020c01ddb9465cad373ccbe1b6 or
> > https://gist.github.com/rmannibucau/b0cff6375af78d3702b5a2c7b8a6a99c if
> > you
> > want to bypass container event test for "not extension" instances (can
> save
> > a few tests).
> >
> > Concretely your fix ensures that any extension can catch a container
> > lifecycle event issued of another observer definition which is good but
> > keeps the issue that you can still miss event from another extension.
> > Basically it is the same issue between extensions but for normal events.
> >
> > So I think we should just delay
> >
> > GProcessObserverMethod event = new
> > GProcessObserverMethod(webBeansContext, annotatedMethod, observer);
> > webBeansContext.getBeanManagerImpl().fireEvent(event, true,
> > AnnotationUtil.EMPTY_ANNOTATION_ARRAY);
> >
> >
> > to happen after all observers are defined.
> >
> > So overall I'd be to:
> >
> > 0. we keep the cache during the startup ;)
> > 1. keep the observer definition a single loop
> > 2. move the process observer method event firing after all extensions
> > observers definition if possible (means that worse case some vetoed
> > observer will be executed during this time but it is unlikely and we
> can't
> > help that anyway, even replaying the missed observers - because not yet
> > there - once added)
> >
> > Hope it makes more sense phrased this way and it is not too late to
> write a
> > technical mail ;).
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Arne
> > >
> > > OPEN KNOWLEDGE GmbH
> > > Poststraße 1, 26122 Oldenburg
> > > Mobil: +49 151 - 108 22 942
> > > Tel: +49 441 - 4082-154
> > > Fax: +49 441 - 4082-111
> > > arne.limb...@openknowledge.de
> 

Re: Release?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

is there any update on this?
How far as we from the release?

If it's too long, can we consider doing a release now and a release after
the patch is complete?

Le lun. 11 oct. 2021 à 10:26, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> I think we should wait for Arne's fix then sounds like we would be in good
> shape.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le ven. 8 oct. 2021 à 15:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > All good now.
> > I think we can release now
> >
> > Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
> > >
> > > Looking at the MyFaces issue
> > >
> > > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau  >
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if
> > definingService
> > >> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
> > >> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method
> > handles
> > >> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to
> bypass
> > >> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
> > >>
> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
> a
> > >> écrit :
> > >>
> > >> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> > >> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
> > >> >
> > >> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a
> > lot
> > >> > more).
> > >> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK
> 17+
> > >> it
> > >> > does not work either.
> > >> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the
> switch
> > >> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to
> create
> > >> the
> > >> > proxy from the byte array.
> > >> >
> > >> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the
> same.
> > >> > Where it becomes different is after ...
> > >> >
> > >> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you
> somehow
> > >> need
> > >> > to instantiate it.
> > >> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because
> > there
> > >> is
> > >> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
> > >> >
> > >> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17,
> > then
> > >> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able
> > to
> > >> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> > >> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
> > >> Unsafe.allocateInstance
> > >> > won't call the default constructor.
> > >> >
> > >> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by
> OWB
> > >> and
> > >> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch
> > from
> > >> one
> > >> > to the other without side effects.
> > >> >
> > >> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
> > >> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> > >> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable.
> > >> I'

Re: Release?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

All good now.
I think we can release now

Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 10:42, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK
>
> Looking at the MyFaces issue
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if definingService
>> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
>> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method handles
>> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to bypass
>> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
>> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
>> >
>> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
>> > more).
>> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+
>> it
>> > does not work either.
>> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
>> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create
>> the
>> > proxy from the byte array.
>> >
>> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
>> > Where it becomes different is after ...
>> >
>> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow
>> need
>> > to instantiate it.
>> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there
>> is
>> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
>> >
>> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
>> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
>> >
>> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
>> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
>> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
>> Unsafe.allocateInstance
>> > won't call the default constructor.
>> >
>> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB
>> and
>> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from
>> one
>> > to the other without side effects.
>> >
>> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
>> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
>> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable.
>> I'd go
>> > with a default method in the interface or create an
>> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
>> >
>> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to
>> add a
>> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
>> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
>> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB
>> itself.
>> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
>> > extension.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> a
>> > écrit :
>> >
>> > > Hi JL,
>> > >
>> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
>> constructor -
>> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
>> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
>> > >
>> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
>> > >
>> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user
>> > facing
>> > > part.
>> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we
>> > need
>> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17
>> since
>> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
>> > >
>> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - kno

Re: Release?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

All pushed and testing on TomEE now with the TCK

Looking at the MyFaces issue

Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:47, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> +1 to get a *new* SPI for the allocation (ok if we test if definingService
> is an instanceof it and reuse the same instance but should stay split)
> +1 to port the logic of tomee to OWB around unsafe with new method handles
> if it does not trigger any warning by default (was the reason to bypass
> Unsafe constructor when defining service is set).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 14:25, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
> > We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.
> >
> > For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
> > more).
> > We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+ it
> > does not work either.
> > We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
> > automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create
> the
> > proxy from the byte array.
> >
> > OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
> > Where it becomes different is after ...
> >
> > As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow
> need
> > to instantiate it.
> > In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there
> is
> > no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.
> >
> > For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
> > the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.
> >
> > I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
> > override that behavior in TomEE at least.
> > We can't always use the default constructor. Using
> Unsafe.allocateInstance
> > won't call the default constructor.
> >
> > If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB
> and
> > beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from
> one
> > to the other without side effects.
> >
> > So functionally it's the same with my change.
> > I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
> > implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable. I'd
> go
> > with a default method in the interface or create an
> > InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.
> >
> > The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to
> add a
> > test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
> > InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
> > default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB itself.
> > It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
> > extension.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Hi JL,
> > >
> > > It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the
> constructor -
> > > and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> > > So this shouldn't help TomEE.
> > >
> > > Do you have a test where this change helps?
> > >
> > > side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user
> > facing
> > > part.
> > > I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we
> > need
> > > it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17
> since
> > > the extension points were already set up IIRC).
> > >
> > > Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be
> complicated
> > > for such things ;).
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-

[jira] [Assigned] (OWB-1392) Fully abstract defining class service

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro reassigned OWB-1392:


Assignee: Jean-Louis Monteiro

> Fully abstract defining class service
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1392
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>    Assignee: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
>
> Currently it does not allow to choose between the Unsafe.allocate and 
> reflection call to constructor.
>  
> The allocate is important to not call the constructor.
> For TomEE integration it does allow consistency between TomEE proxies and OWB 
> proxies. And of course, it does allow to go back and forth from TomEE beans 
> to OWB beans.
>  
> It does not functionaly change OWB behavior.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1392) Fully abstract defining class service

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved OWB-1392.
--
Fix Version/s: 2.0.24
   Resolution: Fixed

> Fully abstract defining class service
> -
>
> Key: OWB-1392
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>        Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>    Assignee: Jean-Louis Monteiro
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.0.24
>
>
> Currently it does not allow to choose between the Unsafe.allocate and 
> reflection call to constructor.
>  
> The allocate is important to not call the constructor.
> For TomEE integration it does allow consistency between TomEE proxies and OWB 
> proxies. And of course, it does allow to go back and forth from TomEE beans 
> to OWB beans.
>  
> It does not functionaly change OWB behavior.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Re: Release?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

For the sake of clarity here is our problem.
We want to support JDK 17 in TomEE.

For our proxy creation, we were used to using Unsafe (like OWB and a lot
more).
We changed that to use a method handles lookup, but still from JDK 17+ it
does not work either.
We have a similar service ClassDefiner in TomEE where we do the switch
automatically to ClassLoader.defineClass when it's available to create the
proxy from the byte array.

OWB does that using explicit configuration but overall it is the same.
Where it becomes different is after ...

As soon as you have created the Class with the byte array, you somehow need
to instantiate it.
In TomEE, we still by default use Unsafe.allocateInstance because there is
no replacement for now and it is still working under JDK17.

For OWB, if you switch to using ClassLoader.defineClass for JDK 17, then
the default constructor is used and Unsafe is totally bypassed.

I'm not questioning the choice made, but the fact we need to be able to
override that behavior in TomEE at least.
We can't always use the default constructor. Using Unsafe.allocateInstance
won't call the default constructor.

If we can override OWB default behavior, then CDI beans managed by OWB and
beans managed by TomEE will work the same way and users can switch from one
to the other without side effects.

So functionally it's the same with my change.
I'm almost sure no one is creating it's own DefiningClassService
implementation but the user facing interface argument is acceptable. I'd go
with a default method in the interface or create an
InstanciatingClassService even though it's overkill in my opinion.

The comments in the tests should have been removed. I first wanted to add a
test to reproduce the issue we had in TomEE, but actually
InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest already shows that using
default constructor instead of Unsafe.allocateInstance breaks OWB itself.
It also breaks a couple of other things in TomEE like the security
extension.






Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hi JL,
>
> It looks weird because we already had a fallback to use the constructor -
> and BTW i'm not sure the commented part of the test should be.
> So this shouldn't help TomEE.
>
> Do you have a test where this change helps?
>
> side note: we likely don't want to break the SPI since it is an user facing
> part.
> I saw you mentionned a default method but we should probably check we need
> it at all before (not sure how tomee is different there on java 17 since
> the extension points were already set up IIRC).
>
> Happy to discuss on slack if it is easier - know mails can be complicated
> for such things ;).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > Thanks Thomas
> >
> > I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
> > And I pushed
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722
> >
> > I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a PR
> > sorry.
> > Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to
> override
> > the instanciation part to be consistent.
> >
> >
> > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > > AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
> > >
> > > Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> > > jeano...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > > > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> > > >
> > > > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> > > >
> > > > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > > &

Re: Switching from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Quick and dirty change in AbstractProxyFactory

definingService = new ClassLoaderProxyService(webBeansContext); //
webBeansContext.getService(DefiningClassService.class);

`mvn clean install` under JDK8

[ERROR] Failures:
> [ERROR]   ClassLoaderProxyServiceTest.defineInProxy:45
> expected:
> but
> was: >
> [ERROR]   InterceptorAnnotatedDiscoveryTest.discover:62 expected:<[foo]>
> but was:<[bar]>
> [ERROR]   NormalScopeProxyFactoryTest.testProtectedMethod:321
> expected:<42> but was:<0>
> [ERROR] Errors:
> [ERROR]
> InterceptionOfBeanWithConstructorInjectionTest.checkBeanWasBuiltWithItsConstructorAndIntercepted:54->AbstractUnitTest.startContainer:231->AbstractUnitTest.inject:251
> » IllegalState
> [INFO]
> [ERROR] Tests run: 589, Failures: 3, Errors: 1, Skipped: 5
> [


 Haven't got time to debug and look at why yet

Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 10:14, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> Haven't look quickly but I can easily change the default again and run the
> build again.
>
> Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 08:10, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
>> It is the only identified/expected one at least, did you spot another one?
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>>
>> Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 22:07, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > I'm not sure it's only package scope methods ...
>> >
>> > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 21:59, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> a
>> > écrit :
>> >
>> > > Well it is a config in owb.properties but as mentionned it will not
>> > support
>> > > package scope methods proxying by design (but it is in the spec).
>> > >
>> > > For this, add-opens are required (or a fake module-info workaround).
>> > >
>> > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 21:48, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
>> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > >
>> > > > Here is what I have done 
>> > > >
>> > > > Switch from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService in the
>> > > AbstractProxyFactory.
>> > > > Then, command line and run `mvn clean install`
>> > > >
>> > > > It fails under JDK 8 and under JDK17
>> > > >
>> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:40, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > a
>> > > > écrit :
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Not sure what you mean but we should build on jdk 8 and run on
>> 8-18.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:29, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > a écrit :
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > While investigating some OWB issues, I tried moving default
>> Unsafe
>> > to
>> > > > > > ClassLoaderProxyService, but it looks like I can't build OWB
>> > anymore,
>> > > > on
>> > > > > > JDK8 or even JDK17.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Isn't it supposed to be working out of the box?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> > > > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> > > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Jean-Louis
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Louis
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Switching from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Haven't look quickly but I can easily change the default again and run the
build again.

Le mer. 6 oct. 2021 à 08:10, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> It is the only identified/expected one at least, did you spot another one?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 22:07, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > I'm not sure it's only package scope methods ...
> >
> > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 21:59, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Well it is a config in owb.properties but as mentionned it will not
> > support
> > > package scope methods proxying by design (but it is in the spec).
> > >
> > > For this, add-opens are required (or a fake module-info workaround).
> > >
> > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 21:48, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > Here is what I have done 
> > > >
> > > > Switch from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService in the
> > > AbstractProxyFactory.
> > > > Then, command line and run `mvn clean install`
> > > >
> > > > It fails under JDK 8 and under JDK17
> > > >
> > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:40, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Not sure what you mean but we should build on jdk 8 and run on
> 8-18.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:29, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While investigating some OWB issues, I tried moving default
> Unsafe
> > to
> > > > > > ClassLoaderProxyService, but it looks like I can't build OWB
> > anymore,
> > > > on
> > > > > > JDK8 or even JDK17.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Isn't it supposed to be working out of the box?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Release?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Thanks Thomas

I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
And I pushed
https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/2af6184ee5ec6b474f037b3c5768c82bba136722

I'd appreciate feedback, review and comments. Should have created a PR
sorry.
Functionally, it's the same as previously, but it allows TomEE to override
the instanciation part to be consistent.


Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 23:11, Thomas Andraschko 
a écrit :

> AFAIK we didnt start the process yet, so we can wait for your fix
>
> Am Di., 5. Okt. 2021 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeano...@gmail.com>:
>
> > I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
> > I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.
> >
> > Can we reroll it after my fix?
> >
> > Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > We fixed a few issues:
> > > >
> > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298>
> WebsocketUserManager
> > > > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298> Unassigned RESOLVED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387>
> > > > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > > > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1387> Arne Limburg
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=arne>
> > > CLOSED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Remove destroyed
> > > instance
> > > > from memory <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1389> Mark
> > > Struberg
> > > > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> support
> > > > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1390> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391>
> > > AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > > > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1391> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > > RESOLVED
> > > >
> > > > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger
> a
> > > > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> > > >
> > > > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore
> > duplicated
> > > > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> > > >
> > > > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> > > >
> > > > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you
> > since
> > > > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop
> > > release"
> > > > for you.
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

[jira] [Created] (OWB-1392) Fully abstract defining class service

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

Jean-Louis Monteiro created OWB-1392:


 Summary: Fully abstract defining class service
 Key: OWB-1392
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1392
 Project: OpenWebBeans
  Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: Jean-Louis Monteiro


Currently it does not allow to choose between the Unsafe.allocate and 
reflection call to constructor.

 

The allocate is important to not call the constructor.

For TomEE integration it does allow consistency between TomEE proxies and OWB 
proxies. And of course, it does allow to go back and forth from TomEE beans to 
OWB beans.

 

It does not functionaly change OWB behavior.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Re: Release?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

I have an issue with OWB in TomEE under JDK 17
I think I can workaround it, but I'd need a small change in OWB.

Can we reroll it after my fix?

Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 09:29, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 03/10/2021 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We fixed a few issues:
> >
> > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1298
> >  WebsocketUserManager
> > ambigious resolution Jakarta Faces
> >  Unassigned RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1387
> > 
> > @Destroyed(ApplicationScoped.class)
> > not thrown when @Destroyed(RequestScoped.class) exists
> >  Arne Limburg
> > 
> CLOSED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1389
> >  Remove destroyed
> instance
> > from memory  Mark
> Struberg
> > 
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1390
> >  support
> > javax.enterprise.inject.scan.implicit property
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1391
> > 
> AbstractMetaDataDiscovery
> > ignores classpath entries starting with a common path
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> >
> > I know Thomas can await a few of them so wonder if we should trigger a
> > release next week (starting on the 4th) or in the following days.
> >
> > I'd just like to highlight the 1391 changes the way we ignore duplicated
> > jars/folders in in the classpath so can be worth some testing.
> >
> > No issue to delay from some days the release if it helps.
> >
> > Side note for our beloved tomee siblings: this shouldn't impact you since
> > you don't reuse that scanning/lifecycle logic so should be a "noop
> release"
> > for you.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Switching from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

I'm not sure it's only package scope methods ...

Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 21:59, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Well it is a config in owb.properties but as mentionned it will not support
> package scope methods proxying by design (but it is in the spec).
>
> For this, add-opens are required (or a fake module-info workaround).
>
> Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 21:48, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> écrit :
>
> > Here is what I have done 
> >
> > Switch from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService in the
> AbstractProxyFactory.
> > Then, command line and run `mvn clean install`
> >
> > It fails under JDK 8 and under JDK17
> >
> > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:40, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Not sure what you mean but we should build on jdk 8 and run on 8-18.
> > >
> > > Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:29, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com
> > > >
> > > a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > While investigating some OWB issues, I tried moving default Unsafe to
> > > > ClassLoaderProxyService, but it looks like I can't build OWB anymore,
> > on
> > > > JDK8 or even JDK17.
> > > >
> > > > Isn't it supposed to be working out of the box?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Switching from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Here is what I have done 

Switch from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService in the AbstractProxyFactory.
Then, command line and run `mvn clean install`

It fails under JDK 8 and under JDK17

Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:40, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
> Not sure what you mean but we should build on jdk 8 and run on 8-18.
>
> Le mar. 5 oct. 2021 à 20:29, Jean-Louis Monteiro  >
> a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > While investigating some OWB issues, I tried moving default Unsafe to
> > ClassLoaderProxyService, but it looks like I can't build OWB anymore, on
> > JDK8 or even JDK17.
> >
> > Isn't it supposed to be working out of the box?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Switching from Unsafe to ClassLoaderProxyService

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hi,

While investigating some OWB issues, I tried moving default Unsafe to
ClassLoaderProxyService, but it looks like I can't build OWB anymore, on
JDK8 or even JDK17.

Isn't it supposed to be working out of the box?


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: OWB under JDK 17

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

TomEE environment if we upgrade OWB from 2.0.22 to 2.0.23

Le lun. 4 oct. 2021 à 16:37, Thomas Andraschko 
a écrit :

> What environment?
> FacesDataModelExtension.afterDeploymentValidation is called in
> AfterDeploymentValidation, which is AFTER AfterBeanDiscovery
>
> maybe romain can help
> no idea about java17 :D
>
> Am Mo., 4. Okt. 2021 um 16:24 Uhr schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does anyone already tried running OWB under JDK 17?
> >
> > 2.0.22 seems to produce the following
> >
> > !doctype html>HTTP Status 500 ? Internal
> > Server Errorbody
> > {font-family:Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif;} h1, h2, h3, b
> > {color:white;background-color:#525D76;} h1 {font-size:22px;} h2
> > {font-size:16px;} h3 {font-size:14px;} p {font-size:12px;} a
> > {color:black;} .line
> >
> >
> {height:1px;background-color:#525D76;border:none;}HTTP
> > Status 500 ? Internal Server Error > />Type Exception ReportMessage Cant
> > define proxy
> >
> com.sun.ts.tests.securityapi.idstore.idstorepermission.CustomIdentityStoreHandler$$OwbNormalScopeProxy0Description
> > The server encountered an unexpected condition that prevented it from
> > fulfilling the
> >
> request.Exceptionorg.apache.webbeans.exception.ProxyGenerationException:
> > Cant define proxy
> >
> >
> com.sun.ts.tests.securityapi.idstore.idstorepermission.CustomIdentityStoreHandler$$OwbNormalScopeProxy0
> > On Java 16 you can set --add-exports
> > java.basejdk.internal.misc=ALL-UNNAMED on the JVM
> >
> > org.apache.webbeans.proxy.Unsafe.onProxyGenerationError(Unsafe.java:295)
> >
> > org.apache.webbeans.proxy.Unsafe.defineAndLoadClass(Unsafe.java:281)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.proxy.AbstractProxyFactory.createProxyClass(AbstractProxyFactory.java:336)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.proxy.AbstractProxyFactory.createProxyClass(AbstractProxyFactory.java:306)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.proxy.NormalScopeProxyFactory.createProxyClass(NormalScopeProxyFactory.java:264)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.proxy.NormalScopeProxyFactory.createProxyClass(NormalScopeProxyFactory.java:192)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.proxy.NormalScopeProxyFactory.createNormalScopeProxy(NormalScopeProxyFactory.java:149)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.getReference(BeanManagerImpl.java:791)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.inject.instance.InstanceImpl.create(InstanceImpl.java:297)
> >
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.inject.instance.InstanceImpl.get(InstanceImpl.java:129)
> >
> >
> > Wanted to try 2.0.23 but it fails with MyFaces
> >
> > Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: It's not allowed to call
> > getBeans(Type, Annotation...) before AfterBeanDiscovery
> > at
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectableBeanManager.checkAfterBeanDiscoveryProcessed(InjectableBeanManager.java:423)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectableBeanManager.getBeans(InjectableBeanManager.java:129)
> > at org.apache.myfaces.cdi.util.CDIUtils.lookup(CDIUtils.java:51)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.myfaces.cdi.model.FacesDataModelExtension.afterDeploymentValidation(FacesDataModelExtension.java:82)
> >
> >
> > Any ideas?
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

OWB under JDK 17

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hi all,

Does anyone already tried running OWB under JDK 17?

2.0.22 seems to produce the following

!doctype html>HTTP Status 500 ? Internal
Server Errorbody
{font-family:Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif;} h1, h2, h3, b
{color:white;background-color:#525D76;} h1 {font-size:22px;} h2
{font-size:16px;} h3 {font-size:14px;} p {font-size:12px;} a
{color:black;} .line
{height:1px;background-color:#525D76;border:none;}HTTP
Status 500 ? Internal Server ErrorType Exception ReportMessage Cant
define proxy 
com.sun.ts.tests.securityapi.idstore.idstorepermission.CustomIdentityStoreHandler$$OwbNormalScopeProxy0Description
The server encountered an unexpected condition that prevented it from
fulfilling the 
request.Exceptionorg.apache.webbeans.exception.ProxyGenerationException:
Cant define proxy
com.sun.ts.tests.securityapi.idstore.idstorepermission.CustomIdentityStoreHandler$$OwbNormalScopeProxy0
On Java 16 you can set --add-exports
java.basejdk.internal.misc=ALL-UNNAMED on the JVM
org.apache.webbeans.proxy.Unsafe.onProxyGenerationError(Unsafe.java:295)
org.apache.webbeans.proxy.Unsafe.defineAndLoadClass(Unsafe.java:281)

org.apache.webbeans.proxy.AbstractProxyFactory.createProxyClass(AbstractProxyFactory.java:336)

org.apache.webbeans.proxy.AbstractProxyFactory.createProxyClass(AbstractProxyFactory.java:306)

org.apache.webbeans.proxy.NormalScopeProxyFactory.createProxyClass(NormalScopeProxyFactory.java:264)

org.apache.webbeans.proxy.NormalScopeProxyFactory.createProxyClass(NormalScopeProxyFactory.java:192)

org.apache.webbeans.proxy.NormalScopeProxyFactory.createNormalScopeProxy(NormalScopeProxyFactory.java:149)

org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.getReference(BeanManagerImpl.java:791)

org.apache.webbeans.inject.instance.InstanceImpl.create(InstanceImpl.java:297)

org.apache.webbeans.inject.instance.InstanceImpl.get(InstanceImpl.java:129)


Wanted to try 2.0.23 but it fails with MyFaces

Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: It's not allowed to call
getBeans(Type, Annotation...) before AfterBeanDiscovery
at 
org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectableBeanManager.checkAfterBeanDiscoveryProcessed(InjectableBeanManager.java:423)
at 
org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectableBeanManager.getBeans(InjectableBeanManager.java:129)
at org.apache.myfaces.cdi.util.CDIUtils.lookup(CDIUtils.java:51)
at 
org.apache.myfaces.cdi.model.FacesDataModelExtension.afterDeploymentValidation(FacesDataModelExtension.java:82)


Any ideas?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Meecrowave 1.2.11

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le lun. 26 avr. 2021 à 09:57, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> As mentionned on the list I'd like to release Apache Meecrowave 1.2.11.
>
> Here is the changelog:
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-272
>  Upgrade Tomcat
> v9.0.40  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-273
>  Upgrade to tomcat
> 7.0.41  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-274
>  Provide light
> shades
> of api and core runner without servlet xsd/xml resources
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
>
>
>
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-276
>  @MeecrowaveConfig
> fails if not set with class test instance scope (ie the second test does
> not deploy)  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: New Feature] MEECROWAVE-278
>  CdiContainer (CDI
> SE
> API) ignores beans.xml configuration
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-279
>  Upgrade to tomcat
> 9.0.44  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-280
>  Enable to run
> without a meecrowave OWBScannerService as scanner service
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-281
>  OpenWebBeans 2.0.22
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-282
>  CXF 3.4.3
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-283
>  Provide a jakarta
> bundle of meecrowave-core
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-284
>  Provide a CDI
> friendly websocket module
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-285
>  Upgrade to johnzon
> 1.2.11  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-286
>  Upgrade to log4j
> 2.14.1  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-287
>  Upgrade to xbean
> 4.19
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-288
>  Upgrade to DBCP
> 2.8.0
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> 

Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.22 - take 2

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Not a big deal, but voted as well

[image: image.png]

Thanks Mark for the work.
Have a wonderful weekend

Le sam. 20 mars 2021 à 21:52, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> And here is my +1
>
> So the VOTE did pass with:
>
> +1: David, Romain, Jean-Baptiste, Thomas, Reinhard, Jon, Mark
> no -1 nor 0
>
> txs to all who voted!
>
> Gonna continue with the release
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 17.03.2021 um 15:56 schrieb Mark Struberg  >:
> >
> > Hi lords and ladies!
> >
> > I'd like to call a 2nd  VOTE for releasing Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.22
> >
> > We did fix the following tickets:
> >
> > Bug
> >
> > [OWB-1371  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1371>>] - review
> getCurrentContext to automatically create Contexts
> > [OWB-1372  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1372>>] -
> RequestContextController#deactivate must be a nop if the context was
> already active before
> > [OWB-1373  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1373>>] - EventImpl does not
> resolve Observers properly when running with ParentBM setup
> > [OWB-1374  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1374>>] - Container Lifecycle
> events right now only work during startup
> > [OWB-1376  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1376>>] - Unsafe usage is broken
> > [OWB-1377  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1377>>] - Enable to configure
> the reserved packages for proxies
> > [OWB-1378  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1378>>] - Ensure
> @initialized(appscoped) and its symmetric events can be skipped in se mode
> > New Feature
> >
> > [OWB-1369  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1369>>] - Ensure OWB-web module
> configuration wins over OWB-se module
> > [OWB-1370  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1370>>] - Enable to select the
> CDI SE provider
> > Improvement
> >
> > [OWB-1367  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1367>>] - Bad filter
> url-pattern in demos
> > [OWB-1375  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1375>>] - improve support for
> Java 9++ hacks
> > Task
> >
> > [OWB-1365  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1365>>] -
> org.apache.webbeans.spi.deployer.skipValidations not usable in standard mode
> > [OWB-1366  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1366>>] - WebBeansLoggerFacade
> must not create any logger in its static init block if not needed
> > [OWB-1380  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1380>>] - Annotated mode not
> supported for prescanned scanner service
> >
> >
> > The staging repo can be found here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/
> <
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/
> >
> >
> > The sources zip is at
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.22/
> <
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.22/
> >
> > sha1 is fac3e5ebe645a0c3cedd001419aa864ed3d5e11e
> >
> > Please VOTE
> >
> > [+1] still yippee ki yay, let's ship it, but really!
> > [+0] meh, don't care at all
> > [-1] whoops, stop, there is a ${showstopper}
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
> >
> > txs and LieGrue
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.22 - take 2

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le mer. 17 mars 2021 à 19:24, Thomas Andraschko 
a écrit :

> +1
>
> Jean-Baptiste Onofre  schrieb am Mi., 17. März 2021,
> 18:42:
>
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > > Le 17 mars 2021 à 18:40, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mer. 17 mars 2021 à 17:50, David Blevins 
> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> David Blevins
> > >> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>
> > >> On Mar 17, 2021, at 7:56 AM, Mark Struberg  >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi lords and ladies!
> > >>
> > >> I'd like to call a 2nd  VOTE for releasing Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.22
> > >>
> > >> We did fix the following tickets:
> > >>
> > >> Bug
> > >>
> > >> [OWB-1371  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1371>>] - review
> > >> getCurrentContext to automatically create Contexts
> > >> [OWB-1372  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1372>>] -
> > >> RequestContextController#deactivate must be a nop if the context was
> > >> already active before
> > >> [OWB-1373  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1373>>] - EventImpl does
> not
> > >> resolve Observers properly when running with ParentBM setup
> > >> [OWB-1374  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1374>>] - Container
> Lifecycle
> > >> events right now only work during startup
> > >> [OWB-1376  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1376>>] - Unsafe usage is
> > broken
> > >> [OWB-1377  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1377>>] - Enable to
> configure
> > >> the reserved packages for proxies
> > >> [OWB-1378  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1378>>] - Ensure
> > >> @initialized(appscoped) and its symmetric events can be skipped in se
> > mode
> > >> New Feature
> > >>
> > >> [OWB-1369  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1369>>] - Ensure OWB-web
> > module
> > >> configuration wins over OWB-se module
> > >> [OWB-1370  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1370>>] - Enable to select
> > the
> > >> CDI SE provider
> > >> Improvement
> > >>
> > >> [OWB-1367  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1367>>] - Bad filter
> > >> url-pattern in demos
> > >> [OWB-1375  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1375>>] - improve support
> for
> > >> Java 9++ hacks
> > >> Task
> > >>
> > >> [OWB-1365  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1365>>] -
> > >> org.apache.webbeans.spi.deployer.skipValidations not usable in
> standard
> > mode
> > >> [OWB-1366  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1366>>] -
> > WebBeansLoggerFacade
> > >> must not create any logger in its static init block if not needed
> > >> [OWB-1380  > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1380>>] - Annotated mode
> not
> > >> supported for prescanned scanner service
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The staging repo can be found here:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> The sources zip is at
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.22/
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1070/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.22/
> > >>>
> > >> sha1 is fac3e5ebe645a0c3cedd001419aa864ed3d5e11e
> > >>
> > >> Please VOTE
> > >>
> > >> [+1] still yippee ki yay, let's ship it, but really!
> > >> [+0] meh, don't care at all
> > >> [-1] whoops, stop, there is a ${showstopper}
> > >>
> > >> The VOTE is open for 72h.
> > >>
> > >> txs and LieGrue
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebbeans 2.0.21

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Thanks

Le mer. 6 janv. 2021 à 09:30, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> My own +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le lun. 4 janv. 2021 à 05:52, Jean-Baptiste Onofre  a
> écrit :
>
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > > Le 3 janv. 2021 à 20:56, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Here is the vote for our OWB 2.0.21.
> > >
> > > Overall we have two main changes:
> > >
> > > 1. fix OwbRequestContextController web integration
> > > 2. add some startup improvements and enable to use graalvm to convert a
> > cdi
> > > se OWB application to a native one
> > >
> > > Here is the changelog:
> > >
> > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatus
> > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1355
> > > 
> > OwbRequestContextController
> > > does not work with web contexts service
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1356
> > >  Use lazy logger
> lookup
> > for
> > > error only usages 
> > Romain
> > > Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1357
> > >  Enable to skip some
> > > Extension resolution when there is no observer
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1358
> > >  [CDI-SE] enable to
> > > configure custom services through properties
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1359
> > >  Simplify extension
> > > manipulation by making DefaultLoaderService more easily extensible
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1360
> > > 
> > ProcessSyntheticObserverMethod
> > > not considered as a container event
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1361
> > >  Some startup time
> > > improvements  Romain
> > > Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1362
> > >  using static proxy
> > names
> > > can lead to a NPE with xxhash64 algorithm
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1363
> > >  Add a
> > > PreScannedCDISeScannerService service for cdi se module
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1364
> > >  Proxy unique hash
> > > computation should ignore Object methods (always in the same bucket)
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > >
> > > Tag:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=openwebbeans.git;a=commit;h=cb11ec2cb48443220ef8b04c633073b7f7c88916
> > > Staging:
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1068/
> > > Dist: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
> > > My key is the same than last time.
> > >
> > > Please vote:
> > >
> > > [ 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.19 - take 2

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le lun. 19 oct. 2020 à 10:12, Arne Limburg 
a écrit :

> +1
>
>
> --
>
> Arne Limburg - Enterprise Architekt
>
>
>
>
> OPEN KNOWLEDGE GmbH
> Poststraße 1, 26122 Oldenburg
> Mobil: +49 151 - 108 22 942
> Tel: +49 441 - 4082-154
> Fax: +49 441 - 4082-111
> arne.limb...@openknowledge.de
> www.openknowledge.de 
>
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht Oldenburg, HRB 4670
> Geschäftsführer: Lars Röwekamp, Jens Schumann
>
> Treffen Sie uns auf kommenden Konferenzen und Workshops:
>
> Zu unseren Events
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> Von: Thomas Andraschko 
> Gesendet: Montag, 19. Oktober 2020 09:48
> An: openwebbeans-dev
> Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.19 - take 2
>
> +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau  schrieb am Mo., 19. Okt. 2020,
> 09:27:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le dim. 18 oct. 2020 à 21:06, Daniel Dias Dos Santos <
> > daniel.dias.analist...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 07:21 Mark Struberg 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Good morning!
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to call a 2nd round of VOTE on releasing Apache OpenWebBeans
> > > > 2.0.19.
> > > >
> > > > The following tickets got resolved:
> > > >
> > > > Bug
> > > >[OWB-1349] - Respect configuration that is made via
> > > > BeforeBeanDiscovery#configureQualifier
> > > >
> > > > Task
> > > >[OWB-1350] - upgrade to xbean-asm9-shaded for Java16 support
> > > >[OWB-1351] - update various dependencies
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The staging repo is:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1065/
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1065/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The source release can be found in
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1065/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.19/
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1065/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.19/
> > > > >
> > > > sha1 is 5ec7eb6da6f42a73a7f20bb82b26070b7cb131fe
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please VOTE
> > > >
> > > > [+1] go ship it
> > > > [+0] meh, don't care
> > > > [-1] stop, there is a ${showstopper}
> > > >
> > > > The VOTE is open for 72h
> > > >
> > > > Here is my own one for the start.
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > txs and LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.18

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le mer. 9 sept. 2020 à 08:49, Vicente Rossello  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> Tested, everything works in our build
>
> El mié., 9 sept. 2020 8:36, Thomas Andraschko  >
> escribió:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau  schrieb am Mi., 9. Sep. 2020,
> > 08:22:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mar. 8 sept. 2020 à 13:29, Daniel Cunha  a
> > écrit
> > > :
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Em ter., 8 de set. de 2020 às 02:40, Daniel Dias Dos Santos <
> > > > daniel.dias.analist...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2020, 11:22 Mark Struberg  >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > hi!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.17
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The following tickets have been resolved:
> > > > > > Sub-task
> > > > > > [OWB-1346] - prevent scanning of generated proxies
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bug
> > > > > > [OWB-1281] - java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError in scanner stops
> > > > > > application deployment
> > > > > > [OWB-1328] - NPE in AbstractMetaDataFactory
> > > > > > [OWB-1332] - BeansDeployer#packageVetoCache does not work for
> > > > > negative
> > > > > > hits
> > > > > > [OWB-1333] - [junit5] @Cdi#onStart not working
> > > > > > [OWB-1341] - Event bus: IN_PROGRESS phase should not be sent
> to
> > > > > > transactionService
> > > > > > [OWB-1342] - Improve startup performance
> > > > > > [OWB-1344] - Ensure creating annotatedtype is thread safe at
> > > > runtime
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Task
> > > > > > [OWB-1327] - Run TCK for jakarta packaging
> > > > > > [OWB-1329] - Remove openwebbeans-maven module
> > > > > > [OWB-1330] - Junit5 parameter resolver companion for @Cdi
> > > > > > [OWB-1331] - Create ajunit5 @Scopes extension to be able to
> > > > control a
> > > > > > bit more the started scopes
> > > > > > [OWB-1343] - Add a property to skip @Vetoed check on packages
> > > > > > [OWB-1345] - Upgrade gradle shadow plugin support to v6.0.0
> > > > > > [OWB-1347] - upgrade to apache-parent 23
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The staging repo is
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1063/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > commit in our repo is 2a97bc8250c4ed0d7cf36399c495c8898dbec216
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The source release can be found in
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1063/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.18/
> > > > > > sha1
> > > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1063/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.18/sha1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > is 05532a06561f560100def9e26d4df066f3db0e40
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please VOTE:
> > > > > > [+1] let's ship it
> > > > > > [0] meh, don't care
> > > > > > [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The VOTE is open for 72h
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > txs and LieGrue,
> > > > > > strub
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Daniel "soro" Cunha
> > > > https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.13

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le ven. 22 nov. 2019 à 15:05, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> My own +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 20 nov. 2019 à 22:32, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 1:30 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Here is the vote for our beloved Apache OpenWebBeans v2.0.13.
> > >
> > > This is mainly a bugfix release for bean configurator support and OSGi
> > > version ranges. Here is the changelog:
> > >
> > > 1–3 of 3View in Issue Navigator
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=statusCategory%20=%20done%20AND%20project%20=%2012310844%20AND%20fixVersion%20=%2012346284%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC,%20key%20ASC
> > > >
> > >
> > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1299
> > >  Add an
> > > openwebbeans.properties property to not scan jars with an extension
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1301
> > >  OSGi ranges are not
> > > tolerating current spec releases
> > >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1302
> > > 
> addBean().produceWith()
> > > not supported  Romain
> > > Manni-Bucau
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > >
> > > RESOLVED
> > >
> > > Staging repository with sources:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1058
> > > Dist (dev) area:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/2.0.13/ (rev
> > > 36828)
> > > Tag:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=openwebbeans.git;a=commit;h=b03ab4607a83b04d7004067a5e3cdf912543a157
> > > My key is the same than last time.
> > >
> > > Please VOTE
> > > [+1] Release it
> > > [-1] Don't release because ${blocker}
> > >
> > > The VOTE is open for 72h.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Meecrowave 1.2.9

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le jeu. 3 oct. 2019 à 08:40, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> my own +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le lun. 30 sept. 2019 à 10:26, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a
> écrit :
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I'd like to release Meecrwave 1.2.9.
> >
> > Here is our changelog:
> >
> > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-196
> >  Upgrade XBean to
> > v4.14  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: New Feature] MEECROWAVE-197
> >  Start a proxy
> > module enabling to proxy another http server
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-198
> >  Upgrade to Tomcat
> > 9.0.24  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-199
> > 
> Meecrowave.Builder
> > should be more like a Builder indeed ;)
> >  Mark Struberg
> > 
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-200
> >  Johnzon
> > BufferStrategy doesn't take effect for JSON-B underlying JSON-P
> components
> >  Mark Struberg
> > 
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-201
> >  Ensure server and
> > client cxf bus can be shared
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-202
> >  Ensure
> > configuration, context and tomcat customizers are sortable using
> @Priority
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-203
> >  having multiple
> > meecrowave.properties lead to random behaviour
> >  Mark Struberg
> > 
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-204
> >  quickSession
> > configuration does not work anymore on recent tomcat version
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-205
> >  upgrade to
> > Johnzon-1.1.13 
> Mark
> > Struberg
> > 
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-206
> >  Ensure
> > meecrowave-core does not rely on any scanning
> >  Mark Struberg
> > 
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-207
> >  Add reload
> feature
> > to meecrowave:run 
> Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-208
> >  Upgrade to cxf
> > 3.3.3  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.12

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

my +1
Thanks Romain

Le jeu. 3 oct. 2019 à 08:40, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
écrit :

> my own +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 1 oct. 2019 à 13:41, Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>
> > retested the issue and seems to work
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Am Di., 1. Okt. 2019 um 06:49 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hi Thomas
> > >
> > > Think so but was waiting for user feedback to close it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Le lun. 30 sept. 2019 à 23:25, Thomas Andraschko <
> > > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Hi Romain,
> > > >
> > > > just a short question:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1298 is actually also in
> the
> > > > release?
> > > > We made OWB less strict and can close the issue?
> > > >
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > > > >
> > > > Virenfrei.
> > > > www.avast.com
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > > > >
> > > > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > > >
> > > > Am Mo., 30. Sept. 2019 um 10:10 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to release OWB 2.0.12,
> > > > >
> > > > > here is our changelog:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1289
> > > > >  Enable to define
> > > > proxies
> > > > > without unsafe to avoid JVM warnings
> > > > >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > >
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1292
> > > > > 
> StackOverflowError
> > in
> > > > > GenericsUtil.satisfiesDependency with parametrized type
> > > > >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > >
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1294
> > > > >  disable
> > > > > implicitInjectionPoint by default
> > > > >  Mark Struberg
> > > > > <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg>
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1295
> > > > >  OWB JSF
> > > > > ConversationAwareViewHandler fails without active SessionContext
> > > > >  Thomas Andraschko
> > > > > <
> > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=tandraschko
> > > > >
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1296
> > > > >  Enable
> > > openwebbeans-web
> > > > > to
> > > > > start CDI context before ServletContextListener
> > > > >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> > > > > >
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1297
> > > > >  Instance#iterator
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > > thread safe 
> > > Unassigned
> > > > > RESOLVED
> > > > >
> > > > > Staging repository (with sources):
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1056
> > > > > Tag:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=openwebbeans.git;a=tag;h=b08a6881e2c5e6e2e20ebf52ac5ce053d8041e60
> > > > > My key is the same than last time
> > > > >
> > > > > Please VOTE
> > > > > [+1] Release it like that
> > > > > [-1] Don't release because ${blocker}
> > > > >
> > > > > The VOTE is open for 72h.
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > > >  | Old Blog
> > > > >  | Github <
> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

Re: [meecrowave] drop jolokia module?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Same here. I would remove it.
If needed, we have git to restore it.

Le mer. 21 août 2019 à 09:35, Thomas Andraschko 
a écrit :

> +0.5
> never used it and will probably never use it :)
>
> Am Mi., 21. Aug. 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Up?
> >
> > Le sam. 17 août 2019 à 20:40, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > Anyone aware of the jolokia module? We are pretty behind and I never
> saw
> > > it used - guess docker made it deprecated almost as soon as it was
> added
> > :(.
> > >
> > > Do we want to drop it?
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github
> > >  | LinkedIn
> > >  | Book
> > > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenWebBeans 2.0.11

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le lun. 27 mai 2019 à 14:47, Reinhard Sandtner 
a écrit :

> +1
>
> lg
> reini
>
> > Am 27.05.2019 um 11:31 schrieb Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Mark Struberg  schrieb am Mo., 27. Mai 2019,
> > 10:55:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> txs and LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>> Am 26.05.2019 um 10:41 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>
> >>> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> Here is the vote for openwebbeans 2.0.11.
> >>>
> >>> Here is the changelog:
> >>>
> >>> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> >>> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1282
> >>>  Reduce reflection
> usage
> >>> for default services in WebBeansContext
> >>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> <
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1283
> >>>  Upgrade xbean to 4.13
> >>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> <
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>> [image: Major] [image: New Feature] OWB-1285
> >>>  Jetty 9 Plugin
> >>>  Mark Struberg
> >>> 
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1286
> >>>  Add JUnit 5
> integration
> >>> around CDI SE API 
> >> Romain
> >>> Manni-Bucau
> >>> <
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>> [image: Major] [image: Task] OWB-1287
> >>>  Add
> >>> org.apache.webbeans.application.supportsImplicitQualifierInjection to
> >>> enable to skip @Inject for injections based on qualifiers
> >>>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> <
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED
> >>> [image: Minor] [image: Wish] OWB-1259
> >>>  Allow
> >> InterceptionFactory
> >>> to be parameterized with an interface
> >>>  Unassigned RESOLVED
> >>>
> >>> The staging repository (with source bundle) is there:
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1054/
> >>> (
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1054/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.11/
> >>> )
> >>> The tag is there:
> >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/tags/openwebbeans-2.0.11/
> >>> My key is the same than last time
> >>>
> >>> Please vote
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 let's get it out
> >>> [ ] -1 ${because X}
> >>>
> >>> Vote will be opened as usual (3 days or until we get 3 bindings +1)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >>>  | Old Blog
> >>>  | Github <
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> >>> LinkedIn  | Book
> >>> <
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Meecrowave 1.2.8

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le lun. 27 mai 2019 à 10:57, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 26.05.2019 um 10:58 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Here is the vote for Apache Meecrowave 1.2.8.
> >
> > Here is the changelog:
> >
> >
> > PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-166
> >  make mw-groovy
> work
> > with Java11 
> Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-186
> >  Gradle plugin id
> > uses microwave and not meecrowave
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-188
> >  Upgrade xbean to
> 4.13
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-189
> >  Upgrade to tomcat
> > 9.0.19  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-190
> >  OWBJarScanner
> > shouldn't fail is the jar does not exist
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-191
> >  Upgrade to CXF
> 3.3.2
> >  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-192
> >  Upgrade to tomcat
> > 9.0.20  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-193
> >  Upgrade to log4j
> > 2.11.2  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-194
> >  Upgrade to
> Johnzon
> > 1.1.12  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-195
> >  Upgrade
> OpenWebBeans
> > to 2.0.11  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> >
> > Here is the staging repository with the source bundle:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1055/
> > (
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1055/org/apache/meecrowave/meecrowave/1.2.8/
> > )
> > Here is the tag:
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/meecrowave/tags/meecrowave-1.2.8/
> > My key is the same than last time
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > [ ] +1 no issue
> > [ ] -1 ${cause}
> >
> > Vote will be opened as usual 3 days or until we get 3 +1 bindings.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [DISCUSS] also move the Meecrowave repo to GITbox?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le jeu. 9 mai 2019 à 09:28, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> +1 to tc+fixes release with svn then move.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 09.05.2019 um 09:24 schrieb Reinhard Sandtner <
> reinhard.sandt...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> >
> >> Am 09.05.2019 um 09:15 schrieb Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Am Do., 9. Mai 2019 um 09:01 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> +1 but maybe after next release - we didnt cut one since last fixes
> right?
> >>> What about post tomcat+johnzon upgrades?
> >>>
> >>> Le jeu. 9 mai 2019 à 08:52, Mark Struberg 
> a
> >>> écrit :
> >>>
>  hi folks!
> 
>  Since we now already moved OWB itself and the meecrowave-examples,
> should
>  we also move Meecrowave to GIT?
>  This is affect the last remaining project sticking with SVN (except
> the
>  site which will remain SVN).
> 
>  wdyt?
> 
>  I'm +1 for moving meecrowave to GIT as well.
> 
>  LieGrue,
>  strub
> 
> 
> >>>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] move OpenWebBeans core repo to GIT?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

It does not hurt for sure.

Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 22:09, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> It will make applying changes easier. And it will make working with
> branches easier.
> I'm talking about the upcoming jakarta migration...
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 03.05.2019 um 18:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > -+0, will not change anything IMHO
> >
> > Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 16:19, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
> > écrit :
> >
> >> Yess +1
> >>
> >> Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 16:19, Jonathan Gallimore <
> >> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> >> a écrit :
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 12:31 PM Mark Struberg
>  >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> hi folks!
> >>>>
> >>>> Do we want to move OWB core to GIT?
> >>>>
> >>>> wdyt?
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd be +1
> >>>>
> >>>> LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean-Louis
> >>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [DISCUSS] move OpenWebBeans core repo to GIT?

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Yess +1

Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 16:19, Jonathan Gallimore 
a écrit :

> +1
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 12:31 PM Mark Struberg 
> wrote:
>
> > hi folks!
> >
> > Do we want to move OWB core to GIT?
> >
> > wdyt?
> >
> > I'd be +1
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
>


-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Meecrowave 1.2.7

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le jeu. 28 févr. 2019 à 00:24, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

>  +1
> builds fineLicense oknotice okheaders finedeps checkedsignature okhashes
> fine
> LieGrue,strub
>
>
> On Monday, 25 February 2019, 09:42:29 CET, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi guys,
>
> Here is the vote for Meecrowave 1.2.7.
>
> Changelog is:
>
> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-180
>  Upgrade to tomcat
> 9.0.16  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-182
>  Support
> antijarlocking configuration globally
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-183
>  OAuth2TokenService
> generated jwt does not include issuer and causes NPE
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> RESOLVED
>
> Tag is here:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/meecrowave/tags/meecrowave-1.2.7/
> (rev 1854304)
> Staging is here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1053
> Sources are here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1053/org/apache/meecrowave/meecrowave/1.2.7/
> And my key is the same as last time.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Meecrowave 1.2.5

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le ven. 11 janv. 2019 à 10:43, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 11.01.2019 um 09:36 schrieb Reinhard Sandtner <
> reinhard.sandt...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > lg reini
> >
> >> Am 09.01.2019 um 12:26 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> Hi guys,
> >>
> >> Here is the vote for Meecrowave 1.2.5.
> >>
> >> We fixed 21 issues:
> >>
> >> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> >> [image: Critical] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-91
> >>  RequestScoped
> context
> >> not active for @Observes @Initialized(ApplicationScoped.class)
> >>  Unassigned
> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-151
> >>  Exclude jacoco
> agent
> >> from default scanning
> >>  Romain
> >> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-152
> >>  eclude osgi
> >> versioning from default scanning
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-153
> >>  Upgrade XBean
> to 4.11
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-154
> >>  Upgrade
> OpenWebBeans
> >> 2.0.10  Mark
> Struberg
> >> 
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-157
> >>  CXF 3.2.7
> upgrade
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-158
> >>  Upgrade to
> xbean 4.12
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Task] MEECROWAVE-160
> >>  Tomcat 9.0.14
> upgrade
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-161
> >>  Make Meecrowave
> >> build with Java11 
> Mark
> >> Struberg
> >> 
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-162
> >>  Support to run
> >> without cxf and johnzon
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-163
> >>  Makes it easier
> to
> >> drop log4j2 
> Romain
> >> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] MEECROWAVE-164
> >>  Drop
> >> org.apache.catalina package from our codebase
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-165
> >>  Interface based
> >> JAX-RS services not supported
> >>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> >> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> >> RESOLVED
> >> [image: Major] [image: Bug] MEECROWAVE-167
> >> 
> meecrowave-spec-api
> >> jar leaks the geronimo spec dependencies
> >>  Mark Struberg
> >> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.10

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le ven. 11 janv. 2019 à 10:43, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

> +1 LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 09.01.2019 um 11:34 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I'd like to call a vote for OWB 2.0.10. Issues fixed are:
> >
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1273
> >  Extension wildcard
> types
> > leak parameterized types
> >  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1274
> >  BeanConfigurator does
> not
> > compute implicitly a passivationid when needed
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1275
> >  BeanConfigurator does
> not
> > add properly Any and Default literals when no qualifier was set
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Bug] OWB-1276
> >  BeanConfigurator does
> not
> > define @Default/@Any properly for @Named qualified beans
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1277
> >  We can't proxy a bean
> with
> > a writeReplace  Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1278
> >  Default exclusions are
> not
> > geronimo friendly 
> Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > Staging repo:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1050
> > Sources:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1050/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.10/
> > Dist Dev area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
> > (rev 31837)
> > Tag: *
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/tags/openwebbeans-2.0.10/
> >  >*
> > (rev 1850843)
> >
> > Please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] go for it!
> > [-1] No, because there this ${issue} is blocking
> >
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h as usual.
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

[RESULT] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-1.7.6

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Hi,

We have so far

7 +1s (Daniel, Thomas, Reinhard, Romain, Jonathan, Jean-Louis and Mark)

No other vote.

Vote passes. I'll proceed with next steps

Le jeu. 20 déc. 2018 à 14:30, Mark Struberg  a
écrit :

>  +1
> LieGrue,strub
>
> On Wednesday, 19 December 2018, 15:26:33 CET, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <
> jeano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Here is my own +1
>
> Le mer. 19 déc. 2018 à 01:08, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 2:26 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mar. 18 déc. 2018 à 15:09, Reinhard Sandtner <
> > > reinhard.sandt...@gmail.com>
> > > a écrit :
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > lg
> > > > reini
> > > >
> > > > > Am 18.12.2018 um 13:40 schrieb Thomas Andraschko <
> > > > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > could you please also add your key for the future to the OWB svn
> root
> > > > KEYS
> > > > > file? It seems that we 2 have key files.
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Di., 18. Dez. 2018 um 12:16 Uhr schrieb Daniel Cunha <
> > > > > daniels...@apache.org>:
> > > > >
> > > > >> +1
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Em seg, 17 de dez de 2018 2:04 PM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > >> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com escreveu:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I'd like to call a vote for the openwebbeans maintenance release
> > > 1.7.6.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Improvement
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  - [OWB-1266 <https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1266>] -
> > > [perf]
> > > > >>>  InjectionResolver cache can be activated earlier
> > > > >>>  - [OWB-1270 <https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1270>] -
> > > > >>>  "Extracting unsafe proxy code in an Unsafe class" backport into
> > > 1.7.*
> > > > >>> line
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> SVN tag (r1849106)
> > > > >>>
> > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/tags/openwebbeans-1.7.6
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Staging repo is available at
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1049
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I've used my standard sig and key.
> > > > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openwebbeans/KEYS
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> New release created on JIRA for the next iteration.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Please VOTE:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> [+1] let's ship it
> > > > >>> [+0] meh, don't care
> > > > >>> [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The VOTE is open for 72h.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis



-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWebBeans-2.0.9

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

+1

Le jeu. 20 déc. 2018 à 11:04, Reinhard Sandtner 
a écrit :

> +1
>
> lg
> reini
>
> > Am 20.12.2018 um 10:33 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > +1 from me as well
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >
> >
> > Le lun. 17 déc. 2018 à 17:07, Daniel Cunha  a
> écrit :
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Em seg, 17 de dez de 2018 às 11:50, Thomas Andraschko <
> >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> >>
> >>> - tests in my applications are fine
> >>> - build is fine
> >>> - checksum matches
> >>> - signature is fine
> >>>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> Am Mo., 17. Dez. 2018 um 10:38 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
>  Hi guys,
> 
>  I'd like to call a vote for OWB 2.0.9 release.
> 
>  Main issues are:
> 
>  [image: Major] [image: Improvement] OWB-1272
>   [perf] enhance scan
>  excludes  Thomas
>  Andraschko
>  <
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=tandraschko
> 
>  RESOLVED
>  [image: Minor] [image: Improvement] OWB-1271
>   repeatable cache
>  shouldn't
>  rely on throwing/catching NPE
>  
> 
>  Staging repo:
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1048/
>  Sources:
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-1048/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/2.0.9/
>  Dist Dev area:
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openwebbeans/owb/
>  (rev 31564)
>  Tag:
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/tags/openwebbeans-2.0.9/
>  (rev 1849073)
> 
>  Please VOTE:
> 
>  [+1] go for it!
>  [-1] No, because there this ${issue} is blocking
> 
> 
>  The VOTE is open for 72h.
> 
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
>  @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>   | Old Blog
>   | Github <
>  https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>  LinkedIn  | Book
>  <
> 
> >>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Daniel "soro" Cunha
> >> https://twitter.com/dvlc_
> >>
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

Re: Backport for OWB 1.7.x

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

VOTE is up and binaries ready for review.

Hope it helps

Le lun. 17 déc. 2018 à 17:07, Daniel Cunha  a écrit :

> +1. Thanks Jean-Louis! :D
>
> Em seg, 17 de dez de 2018 às 11:50, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>
> > +1, thanks Jean-Louis!
> >
> > On Mon, 17 Dec 2018, 14:36 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  wrote:
> >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Are we ready to roll it out then?
> > > I ca do it whenever it's needed this week.
> > >
> > > Le lun. 3 déc. 2018 à 11:13, Daniel Cunha  a
> > écrit
> > > :
> > >
> > > > Hi Thomas,
> > > >
> > > > Sure, I'll close.
> > > > Thank you too!
> > > >
> > > > Em seg, 3 de dez de 2018 às 07:11, Thomas Andraschko <
> > > > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> > > >
> > > > > Merged it. Thank you Daniel for the patch!
> > > > > Also "resolved" the JIRA ticket.
> > > > >
> > > > > @Daniel Could you please close your PR then?
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Sa., 1. Dez. 2018 um 17:14 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, looks good
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le sam. 1 déc. 2018 14:28, Thomas Andraschko <
> > > > > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > a écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can i merge it romain?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Am Do., 22. Nov. 2018, 14:39 hat Daniel Cunha <
> > > daniels...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > geschrieben:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ok. patch updated again. :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Em qui, 22 de nov de 2018 às 10:32, Daniel Cunha <
> > > > > daniels...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > escreveu:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ah..
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, I get it!
> > > > > > > > > Thanks Thomas and Jon
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Em qui, 22 de nov de 2018 às 10:30, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > > > > > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> I think you can keep ASM 7, but leave this:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/pull/13/commits/cb600aada79427ab7eff31e7da92038b6af6ed19#diff-f58069aef7df21dd8d4b0bd3546a747aR104
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> as `return Opcodes.V1_6;`.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Hope that helps.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Jon
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 1:26 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > +1 Thomas
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > >> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > > > >> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > > > >> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > > > > >> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > > > > >> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> Book
> > > > > > > > >> > <
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>

[jira] [Assigned] (OWB-1270) "Extracting unsafe proxy code in an Unsafe class" backport into 1.7.* line

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO (JIRA)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1270?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis MONTEIRO reassigned OWB-1270:


Assignee: Daniel Cunha

> "Extracting unsafe proxy code in an Unsafe class" backport into 1.7.* line
> --
>
> Key: OWB-1270
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1270
> Project: OpenWebBeans
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>Affects Versions: 1.7.5
>Reporter: Bruno Baptista
>Assignee: Daniel Cunha
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.7.6
>
>
> Trunk has an important fix for JDK11 support that needs to be backported into 
> the 1.7.* line.
> See: 
> https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/37e56343b92996ef3bed4535a2728c034f8d7725



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)