Dear DS team!
Two months ago the team discussed a 0.6 release. What is your plan? There are
many new great features since 0.5, so what is stopping the DS-team to provide a
new release?
Looking through the JIRA there are 30 open issues, many of them regards JSF and
Tests. I don’t use JSF
+1 for 0.6 and 1.0 as the next release after 0.6
2014-02-16 12:40 GMT+01:00 Ove Ranheim oranh...@gmail.com:
Dear DS team!
Two months ago the team discussed a 0.6 release. What is your plan? There
are many new great features since 0.5, so what is stopping the DS-team to
provide a new
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-521?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13902689#comment-13902689
]
Gerhard Petracek commented on DELTASPIKE-521:
-
it looks like an issue in
Hi Gerhard,
Was your point the commit graph or the professional support?
I would recognize Apache Software to be an Open Source Foundation. My intent
was not identify myself as a customer to shop commercial product support, on
something not completed, but to urge the importance of getting
+1 Ove
We are really late for an 0.6. I would release 0.6 this/next month and
after that, lets finish 1.0.
We should fix all open issues and finish the documentation!
hi ove,
i was only talking about the commits.
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF/JavaEE powerhouse -
JavaEE Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2014-02-16 22:07 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko andraschko.tho...@gmail.com:
Probably because we've become busy with some other projects and priorities :(—
Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Ove Ranheim oranh...@gmail.com wrote:
The commit graph shows too few committers.. and I appreciate your work!
I also notice too few Redhat/JBoss
Yes would be great to get this sorted out soon. Looks like 2) is the
preferred way to go, which would also mean some work on the JPA module.
- Any thoughts on how the Data EntityManagerResolver fits in the picture
there?
- Also [1] seems rather nasty in this context. Is there a better way
dealing
Hello,
1) a producer + qualifier would be easier on entitymanager side so I'd
propagate it to the repository.
2) em in transactionscoped should be useless since if you produce the
em you are already in a scope so already cached by CDI itself, no?
3) we don't really need interceptors since we can
