Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues
On 6/26/07, Seldon, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martijn - Thanks for your helpful email. The links to the issues list did > the trick regarding issues tracking. No problem, just trying to help out. > Server that would permit usage of Java 1.5. Depending upon IBM and its plans > for future releases, and buy in from our Company to adopt the future > releases and undertake such a migration - we must accept that we are > working with Java version 1.4. Personally, i wish we were in a position to > use 1.5 :( Any ideas then when that is slated to happen? The IBM move I mean? I sure hope it is not 2 years ahead! Probably Wicket moving to 1.5 is not your problem then, but more a stagnant product line of IBM. You are aware that JDK 6 has a supposed increase in performance out-of-the-box of about 30%? > Would the patch ( revision 529917 that specifically addresses the critical > bug in 1.2.4) suffice? Or are there other fixes included with 1.2.6 that > relate to a "security implication" fix? As above, a change of Wicket release > to our code base this close to go-live would rather be avoided if possible. I think that that patch is sufficient to fix the particular security related bug. > Are you saying that 1.3 supports Java 1.4 for all dot releases therein. Yes, for the projects residing in the JDK-1.4 subdirectory. We will not move projects based on jdk 1.4 to jdk 1.5 in Wicket 1.3 > As of Wicket 1.4 there will be a dependency upon 1.5. Again, just looking for > explicit response on this. Yes, but we may call that one 2.0. > Commercially, we are an example where usage of > 1.5 just is not viable. I believe the decision to go with 1.5 will currently > preclude a significant proportion of third party service vendors. I think the market is migrating to JDK 1.5, or has largely migrated to it already. However, Wicket 1.3 is good enough to be around until the migration has completed. > Specifically, for stake holders currently investing in Wicket as a viable > web framework on large scale development projects where Java 1.4 is the > officially supported version what is the position? You imply that such stake > holders can be assured that defects raised in 1.3 will be addressed in 1.3. I can't give assurance: the Wicket project is based on individuals. I can tell a story that would make things less threatening: our community is diverse (scattered across continents, making the bus factor less). There are several core people on the Brittish island, so you may be able to contract them more easily, or even coerce into providing support by supplying ample amounts of beer. And you can join the community. If you want you can strive to join the Wicket core: write documentation, create unit tests, fix issues, provide patches. We will notice that and eventually (possibly sooner than later) grant commit karma. Apache is a meritocracy: earn merit and get privileges. This way is open to anyone! You will become part of the community, so you will need to abide by its rules. > Does Apache provide such assurance? We understand that this assurance would > not necessarily include enhancements but only bug fixes. Apache does not provide assurance for fixing bugs. If you want assurance, then you'll either need to fix it yourself, or hire some third party to do so. Instead, Apache provides assurance of a healthy community. A healthy community typically assures that bugs are fixed :). Fixing bugs can only happen when relevant bug reports are submitted, and they will be fixed even more quickly when a reproducable testcase is provided. The best way to get something fixed is by providing a patch. Most of the core conttributors have projects running on Wicket 1.3. Some of them will move onward with newer Wicket versions, others will keep running on 1.3. Fixing bugs in 1.3 will be a priority, but we of course expect that the number of bugs for 1.3 will become less and less, just as happened with 1.2 and 1.1 before that. When 1.3 is the mainstream release, support for 1.2 will be limited to critical bugs only, and probably 1.2.7 will be the last release for that branch, unless something critical pops up. Support for any particular version is based on the interest of the community. If someone has an interest in providing it (because he wants to be nice, or has his own project running it, or because it helps the framework, or the community) then the release will be supported. One of the greatest examples of a community effort is Maven 1: the core team moved on to build maven 2, which is a complete rewrite. Several people wanted to keep supporting maven 1, and just released Maven 1.1. It took them long enough, but they got there. The same thing can happen with the JDK 1.4 version of Wicket. If enough people have an interest in providing new functionality for the project, then it can keep growing. Or else you can take a look at the retroweaver project to see how that helps in adopting JDK 1.5 code for your Java 1.4 based p
Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues
On Tuesday, June 26, 2007, 10:03:15 AM, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you saying that 1.3 supports Java 1.4 for all dot releases therein. As > of Wicket 1.4 there will be a dependency upon 1.5. Again, just looking for > explicit response on this. The core, i.e. the 'wicket', 'wicket-extensions' & 'wicket-spring' modules, plus some others[*] will remain as Java 1.4 in Wicket 1.3.X, while the next major version (which may or may not be called 1.4) will use Java 1.5 features throughout. [*] See the svn 'trunk/jdk-1.4' sub-tree for the definative list. > Commercially, we are an example where usage of > 1.5 just is not viable. I believe the decision to go with 1.5 will currently > preclude a significant proportion of third party service vendors. I'm afraid that we differ with that belief - personally, it seems to /me/ that it's now only (a subset of?) Websphere users that are constrained to remain at 1.4. The number of which, I'm afraid, has now shrunk to such a size where remaining at that language level is more detrimental to the project than moving on to 1.5 for the primary development. > Specifically, for stake holders currently investing in Wicket as a viable > web framework on large scale development projects where Java 1.4 is the > officially supported version what is the position? You imply that such stake > holders can be assured that defects raised in 1.3 will be addressed in 1.3. > Does Apache provide such assurance? We understand that this assurance would > not necessarily include enhancements but only bug fixes. Well, the fundamental position is that there are no assurances beyond that provided by the Apache software licence. Certainly, the aim/intention is to support 1.3 for defects, but any /assurance/ from Apache or the developers is going to be limited to that provided by the fact that you have access to the (complete) source code & build tools. There's no intention to cut you adrift, but the fact of the matter is that if you need some form of legal assurance, you'd need some form of support contract. /Gwyn - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues
Martijn - Thanks for your helpful email. The links to the issues list did the trick regarding issues tracking. First of all, I want to stress how much we appreciate what everyone involved has achieved with contributing to Wicket. You talk about it being a volunteer project with limited time and resources. Speaking for everyone here, we definitely appreciate this. Just to backtrack and give you some context to our situation. The project I am involved with has over 20 developers projected to take over (minimum of) 2 years code cutting time. It is a large IBM Wepsphere Integration Developer (WID) dev. project located in the UK. >JDK 1.5 is already 2 years available. We have held off developing 1.5 >features for long enough IMO. We are using Websphere Process Server version 6.0.2.1 and this currently necessitates adoption of Websphere application server version 6.0.2.17. Websphere do not support Java SE 1.5 until version 6.1 of the application server. As far as I know, they have not released a version of their Process Server that would permit usage of Java 1.5. Depending upon IBM and its plans for future releases, and buy in from our Company to adopt the future releases and undertake such a migration - we must accept that we are working with Java version 1.4. Personally, i wish we were in a position to use 1.5 :( >What is preventing you to upgrade to 1.2.6? Our medium term strategy is to adopt 1.2.6 (and even 1.3). However, in short term we need to address this issue without the overheads of a full regression test. Expect we'll only get sign off for a patch to this issue short-term. A couple clarifications if possible from your email: >Not knowing the details of your concurrency problem, I would urge >anyone to upgrade to 1.2.6, because of the security implications of >said bug. Would the patch ( revision 529917 that specifically addresses the critical bug in 1.2.4) suffice? Or are there other fixes included with 1.2.6 that relate to a "security implication" fix? As above, a change of Wicket release to our code base this close to go-live would rather be avoided if possible. >That said, we will support Wicket 1.3 for bug fixes, and possibly some >features will be backported (portlet support may be one such feature), >but that is based on available interest, and the impact of said >feature on 1.3. Usually we shy away from API breaks, providing a >binary compatible release on maintenance branches. And yes >*eventually* we will stop support for 1.2 and 1.3 as technology >progresses: this is a volunteer project and we only have limited time >and resources. Are you saying that 1.3 supports Java 1.4 for all dot releases therein. As of Wicket 1.4 there will be a dependency upon 1.5. Again, just looking for explicit response on this. Commercially, we are an example where usage of 1.5 just is not viable. I believe the decision to go with 1.5 will currently preclude a significant proportion of third party service vendors. Specifically, for stake holders currently investing in Wicket as a viable web framework on large scale development projects where Java 1.4 is the officially supported version what is the position? You imply that such stake holders can be assured that defects raised in 1.3 will be addressed in 1.3. Does Apache provide such assurance? We understand that this assurance would not necessarily include enhancements but only bug fixes. Finally, thank you once again. We would like to contribute to the Wicket community. For instance, we've already developed a significant jar project of UI Common components based / built upon Wicket API. Where feasible, we'll be looking for candidates to contribute. Rich. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Martijn Dashorst Sent: 25 June 2007 14:17 To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues On 6/25/07, Seldon, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Really keen to know best place to get a list of outstanding defects between > releases wicket 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 is located? Are there release notes / URL > links etc with this info easily available? Apache issues list starts with > version 1.2.7 but this is no good in our case. Click on the 'Releases' tab and you can see *all* releases. Then you have release notes for 1.2.5 and 1.2.6: * http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310561&sty leName=Html&version=12312236 * http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310561&sty leName=Html&version=12312305 > Our concurrency problem can be reproduced without load testing s/w and > (after exhaustively going through all our "static" code usages and other > possible areas of contention) likely explanation now sits with the version > of Wicket we're using. The Wicket webs
Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues
On 6/25/07, Seldon, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Really keen to know best place to get a list of outstanding defects between > releases wicket 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 is located? Are there release notes / URL > links etc with this info easily available? Apache issues list starts with > version 1.2.7 but this is no good in our case. Click on the 'Releases' tab and you can see *all* releases. Then you have release notes for 1.2.5 and 1.2.6: * http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310561&styleName=Html&version=12312236 * http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310561&styleName=Html&version=12312305 > Our concurrency problem can be reproduced without load testing s/w and > (after exhaustively going through all our "static" code usages and other > possible areas of contention) likely explanation now sits with the version > of Wicket we're using. The Wicket website does include a section about a > critical bug in 1.2.4. In our case, if this is the problem, then it has > proven to be a show-stopper. Not knowing the details of your concurrency problem, I would urge anyone to upgrade to 1.2.6, because of the security implications of said bug. Now that you have it reproducable, could you provide a quickstart/other test so we can fix it? And before that, use 1.2.6 to see if that fixes your problem? > We are hoping to go live with our production release of SOA app in next few > days and have concluded we may need to either go with 1.2.6 (if the > migration is proven to fix our defects in test environments) or apply a > patch to 1.2.4 that covers just whats needed from 1.2.6 to fix the > cross-session issues. What is preventing you to upgrade to 1.2.6? > One other point I'd really like to hear discussion about:- we're using > WID version 2.0.1.2 which provides support for Java 1.4. At present, this > limits us up to Wicket 1.3 - will there be ongoing maintenance support for > users unable to migrate further due to limitations in the current app server > versions of Java support available? JDK 1.5 is already 2 years available. We have held off developing 1.5 features for long enough IMO. That said, we will support Wicket 1.3 for bug fixes, and possibly some features will be backported (portlet support may be one such feature), but that is based on available interest, and the impact of said feature on 1.3. Usually we shy away from API breaks, providing a binary compatible release on maintenance branches. And yes *eventually* we will stop support for 1.2 and 1.3 as technology progresses: this is a volunteer project and we only have limited time and resources. If you are anxious with respect to support for older versions, you might want to consider paid support. Wicket Support (http://wicket-support.com) will be happy to give you options. > As developers, we're definitely pro-Wicket but getting nervous regarding > this project's usage of Wicket and outstanding defects. Especially with > migration route options outlined above. I really don't understand what you are saying here. Martijn -- Wicket joins the Apache Software Foundation as Apache Wicket Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. Download Wicket now! http://wicketframework.org - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues
one of the great things about open source software is that you can investigate an issue like this yourself and suggest a patch. Seldon, Richard wrote: > > Hello all, > > Further to email sent out back on 15/06/07 regarding concurrency issues > using Wicket 1.2.4 and load runner... > > Really keen to know best place to get a list of outstanding defects > between > releases wicket 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 is located? Are there release notes / URL > links etc with this info easily available? Apache issues list starts with > version 1.2.7 but this is no good in our case. > > Our concurrency problem can be reproduced without load testing s/w and > (after exhaustively going through all our "static" code usages and other > possible areas of contention) likely explanation now sits with the version > of Wicket we're using. The Wicket website does include a section about a > critical bug in 1.2.4. In our case, if this is the problem, then it has > proven to be a show-stopper. > > We are hoping to go live with our production release of SOA app in next > few > days and have concluded we may need to either go with 1.2.6 (if the > migration is proven to fix our defects in test environments) or apply a > patch to 1.2.4 that covers just whats needed from 1.2.6 to fix the > cross-session issues. > > One other point I'd really like to hear discussion about:- we're using WID > version 2.0.1.2 which provides support for Java 1.4. At present, this > limits > us up to Wicket 1.3 - will there be ongoing maintenance support for users > unable to migrate further due to limitations in the current app server > versions of Java support available? > > As developers, we're definitely pro-Wicket but getting nervous regarding > this project's usage of Wicket and outstanding defects. Especially with > migration route options outlined above. > Hope some of you can put these fears to rest? > Cheers, Rich. > > > This e-mail (and any attachments) may contain privileged and/or > confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please do > not disclose, copy, distribute, disseminate or take any action in reliance > on it. If you have received this message in error please reply and tell us > and then delete it. Should you wish to communicate with us by e-mail we > cannot guarantee the security of any data outside our own computer > systems. For the protection of Legal & General's systems and staff, > incoming emails will be automatically scanned. > > Any information contained in this message may be subject to applicable > terms and conditions and must not be construed as giving investment advice > within or outside the United Kingdom. > > The following companies are subsidiary companies of the Legal & General > Group Plc which are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services > Authority for advising and arranging the products shown: Legal & General > Partnership Services Limited (insurance and mortgages), Legal & General > Insurance Limited (insurance), Legal & General Assurance Society Limited > (life assurance, pensions and investments), Legal & General Unit Trust > Managers Limited and Legal & General Portfolio Management Services Limited > (investments). > > They are registered in England under numbers shown. > The registered office is Temple Court, 11 Queen Victoria Street, London > EC4N 4TP. > > Legal & General Partnership Services Limited: 5045000 Legal & General > Assurance Society Limited: 166055 Legal & General (Unit Trust Managers) > Limited: 1009418 Legal & General (Portfolio Management Services) Limited: > 2457525 Legal & General Insurance Limited: 423930 > > They are registered with the Financial Services Authority under numbers > shown. You can check this at www.fsa.gov.uk/register > > Legal & General Partnership Services Limited: 300792 Legal & General > Assurance Society Limited: 117659 Legal & General (Unit Trust Managers) > Limited: 119273 Legal & General (Portfolio Management Services) Limited: > 146786 Legal & General Insurance Limited: 202050 > > > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > ___ > Wicket-user mailing list > Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-1.2.4---Cross-session-concurrency-issues-tf3975737.html#a11286305 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/pow
[Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues
Hello all, Further to email sent out back on 15/06/07 regarding concurrency issues using Wicket 1.2.4 and load runner... Really keen to know best place to get a list of outstanding defects between releases wicket 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 is located? Are there release notes / URL links etc with this info easily available? Apache issues list starts with version 1.2.7 but this is no good in our case. Our concurrency problem can be reproduced without load testing s/w and (after exhaustively going through all our "static" code usages and other possible areas of contention) likely explanation now sits with the version of Wicket we're using. The Wicket website does include a section about a critical bug in 1.2.4. In our case, if this is the problem, then it has proven to be a show-stopper. We are hoping to go live with our production release of SOA app in next few days and have concluded we may need to either go with 1.2.6 (if the migration is proven to fix our defects in test environments) or apply a patch to 1.2.4 that covers just whats needed from 1.2.6 to fix the cross-session issues. One other point I'd really like to hear discussion about:- we're using WID version 2.0.1.2 which provides support for Java 1.4. At present, this limits us up to Wicket 1.3 - will there be ongoing maintenance support for users unable to migrate further due to limitations in the current app server versions of Java support available? As developers, we're definitely pro-Wicket but getting nervous regarding this project's usage of Wicket and outstanding defects. Especially with migration route options outlined above. Hope some of you can put these fears to rest? Cheers, Rich. This e-mail (and any attachments) may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please do not disclose, copy, distribute, disseminate or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please reply and tell us and then delete it. Should you wish to communicate with us by e-mail we cannot guarantee the security of any data outside our own computer systems. For the protection of Legal & General's systems and staff, incoming emails will be automatically scanned. Any information contained in this message may be subject to applicable terms and conditions and must not be construed as giving investment advice within or outside the United Kingdom. The following companies are subsidiary companies of the Legal & General Group Plc which are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority for advising and arranging the products shown: Legal & General Partnership Services Limited (insurance and mortgages), Legal & General Insurance Limited (insurance), Legal & General Assurance Society Limited (life assurance, pensions and investments), Legal & General Unit Trust Managers Limited and Legal & General Portfolio Management Services Limited (investments). They are registered in England under numbers shown. The registered office is Temple Court, 11 Queen Victoria Street, London EC4N 4TP. Legal & General Partnership Services Limited: 5045000 Legal & General Assurance Society Limited: 166055 Legal & General (Unit Trust Managers) Limited: 1009418 Legal & General (Portfolio Management Services) Limited: 2457525 Legal & General Insurance Limited: 423930 They are registered with the Financial Services Authority under numbers shown. You can check this at www.fsa.gov.uk/register Legal & General Partnership Services Limited: 300792 Legal & General Assurance Society Limited: 117659 Legal & General (Unit Trust Managers) Limited: 119273 Legal & General (Portfolio Management Services) Limited: 146786 Legal & General Insurance Limited: 202050 - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
