Any other PMC reviewers ?
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 20:47, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
fileinstall 2.0.10
gogo 0.4.0
bundlerepository 1.6.2
bundleplugin 2.1.0
Staging repository:
Closing this vote with:
+1: Richard S. Hall, Guillaume Nodet, Clément Escoffier, Rob Walker, Chris
Custine, Jean-Baptiste Onofré, Sahoo, Gert Vanthienen, Freeman Fang, Jamie
Goodyear
and no other votes.
I'll publish the release asap.
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 09:03, Guillaume Nodet
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2324?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12864313#action_12864313
]
Richard S. Hall commented on FELIX-2324:
But it also says
+1 for OBR, bundleplugin, and for Gogo.
regards,
Karl
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
Any other PMC reviewers ?
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 20:47, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
+1,
I didn't check File Install as I already voted for the other release.
Regards
Clement
On 05.05.2010, at 13:46, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Any other PMC reviewers ?
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 20:47, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following
right, and it's included in this vote anymore actually.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 16:15, Clement Escoffier clement.escoff...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1,
I didn't check File Install as I already voted for the other release.
Regards
Clement
On 05.05.2010, at 13:46, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Any
SCR says that my component is registered twice
--
Key: FELIX-2325
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2325
Project: Felix
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Declarative Services
I noticed while poking around Gogo that its Maven groupId is:
org.apache.felix.gogo
While most other subprojects are:
org.apache.felix
Apparently, Karaf also creates its own groupId. I guess I was under the
assumption that all subprojects were using the same groupId. It doesn't
seem
btw, even in karaf, we have sub-sub groupids, for example:
org.apache.felix.karaf.jaas
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 17:38, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, you don't end up with 100s of jars in org.apache.felix,
so it's better categorized.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 17:20, Richard S.
Yes, you don't end up with 100s of jars in org.apache.felix,
so it's better categorized.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 17:20, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
I noticed while poking around Gogo that its Maven groupId is:
org.apache.felix.gogo
While most other subprojects are:
Hi Richard,
I prefer to have seperated groupId to avoid to have too much jar in the same
directory on the maven repo.
I think that it's easier and more well sorted using groupId directory.
Regards
JB
-Original Message-
From: Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org
Date: Wed, 05 May 2010
Closing this vote with the following votes:
+1: Guillaume Nodet, Richard S. Hall, Gert Vanthienen, Chris Custine,
Freeman Fang, Clément Escoffier, Karl Pauls
No other votes.
I will publish the release now.
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 20:47, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like
On 5/5/10 11:48, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi Richard,
I prefer to have seperated groupId to avoid to have too much jar in the same
directory on the maven repo.
I think that it's easier and more well sorted using groupId directory.
IC. We make it more difficult for us to remember so
On 5/5/10 11:38, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Yes, you don't end up with 100s of jars in org.apache.felix,
so it's better categorized.
I think we can't help but categorize our artifacts, since they are long
names, e.g.:
org.apache.felix.framework-2.0.5.jar
So all gogo JARs are
Please prepend [RESULT] to the subject line when you close a
vote...makes it easier to find in the archives. Thanks!
- richard
On 5/5/10 11:51, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Closing this vote with the following votes:
+1: Guillaume Nodet, Richard S. Hall, Gert Vanthienen, Chris Custine,
Freeman
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:03, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 5/5/10 11:38, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Yes, you don't end up with 100s of jars in org.apache.felix,
so it's better categorized.
I think we can't help but categorize our artifacts, since they are long
names, e.g.:
Yes, sorry. I usually do that, but forgot for this one.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:05, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
Please prepend [RESULT] to the subject line when you close a vote...makes
it easier to find in the archives. Thanks!
- richard
On 5/5/10 11:51, Guillaume
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1473?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum reassigned FELIX-1473:
-
Assignee: Derek Baum
[gogo] The syntax does not provide a way to call methods on a string
On 5/5/10 12:14, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 5/5/10 11:38, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Yes, you don't end up with 100s of jars in org.apache.felix,
so it's better categorized.
I think we can't help but
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:33, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 5/5/10 12:14, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 5/5/10 11:38, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Yes, you don't end up with 100s of jars in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum reassigned FELIX-1493:
-
Assignee: Derek Baum
[gogo] automatic expansion of $args in Closure stops direct access to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1474?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum reassigned FELIX-1474:
-
Assignee: Derek Baum
[gogo] result of commands is implicitly written to pipe
Related to the current discussion about groupIds.
I think to be consistent, you should put this module in the trunk and not in
gogo if the don't inherit the gogo parent and the gogo groupId.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 17:13, rickh...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rickhall
Date: Wed May 5 15:13:43
On 5/5/10 12:40, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:33, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 5/5/10 12:14, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 18:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 5/5/10 11:38, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On 5/5/10 12:41, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Related to the current discussion about groupIds.
I think to be consistent, you should put this module in the trunk and not in
gogo if the don't inherit the gogo parent and the gogo groupId.
Well, inheriting the Gogo parent is fine, but I was
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2325?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger reassigned FELIX-2325:
Assignee: Felix Meschberger
SCR says that my component is registered twice
A quick question:
My initial platform startlevel is set to 3.
If I install a bundle using:
Bundle b = BundleContext.installBundle();
and then use StartLevel.setBundleStartLevel(b, 5);
what should I expect to happen if I then change the framewoork start level
to 10? The spec seems to be unclear
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2325?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger resolved FELIX-2325.
--
Fix Version/s: scr-1.4.2
Resolution: Fixed
Thanks for reporting this issue.
Hi,
On 05.05.2010 19:02, Jackson, Bruce wrote:
A quick question:
My initial platform startlevel is set to 3.
If I install a bundle using:
Bundle b = BundleContext.installBundle();
and then use StartLevel.setBundleStartLevel(b, 5);
what should I expect to happen if I then change the
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
At any rate, I'd argue against using sub-groupIds just from a conceptual
overhead perspective and will likely continue to not use them myself since I
don't really see any added value.
I believe all gogo java code belong
On 5/5/10 14:10, Guo Du wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
At any rate, I'd argue against using sub-groupIds just from a conceptual
overhead perspective and will likely continue to not use them myself since I
don't really see any added value.
Is there a domain name for each of those groupIds? Unless one controls
the domain name, it should not be used as the groupId as per [1]. So, I
would expect all the groupIds to be org.apache.felix for all Felix
subprojects.
Thanks,
Sahoo
[1]
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12864442#action_12864442
]
Jamie goodyear commented on FELIX-2280:
---
Hi Christian,
I'm seeing some errors when I
One could argue the domain name is org.apache, so it's clearly controlled.
On Wednesday, May 5, 2010, Sahoo sa...@sun.com wrote:
Is there a domain name for each of those groupIds? Unless one controls the
domain name, it should not be used as the groupId as per [1]. So, I would
expect all the
AFAIK, there is no domain called org.apache.felix.karaf.jaas. What if
someone else actually owns such a domain name and now wants to publish
some artifacts under that groupId?
Thanks,
Sahoo
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
One could argue the domain name is org.apache, so it's clearly controlled.
On
You have to be kidding.
$ whois felix.apache.org
NOT FOUND
So org.apache.felix is not a valid groupId for you ?
The domain is org.apache and it's own by the ASF. Any subdomain is a valid
groupId for an ASF published jar.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 20:59, Sahoo sa...@sun.com wrote:
AFAIK, there
+1 I fully second this analysis.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 20:10, Guo Du mrdu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
At any rate, I'd argue against using sub-groupIds just from a conceptual
overhead perspective and will likely
AFAIK, there is no domain called org.apache.felix.karaf.jaas. What if
someone else actually owns such a domain name and now wants to publish some
artifacts under that groupId?
They would have to control Apache DNS servers! :-)
Seriously though, I see merits in both sides of this
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
artifactId to groupId.subproject, which means our JARs names are fully
qualified. So for us, artifactId (or JAR name) is all you need to know.
Didn't know this. It's very good practice in the world of OSGi bundles.
For
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Christian Müller updated FELIX-2280:
Attachment: FELIX-2280.patch
Hey Jamie! Sorry, the problem was, that I set up the
On 5/5/10 15:41, Guo Du wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
artifactId to groupId.subproject, which means our JARs names are fully
qualified. So for us, artifactId (or JAR name) is all you need to know.
Didn't know this. It's very good
On 5/5/10 15:27, Chris Custine wrote:
AFAIK, there is no domain called org.apache.felix.karaf.jaas. What if
someone else actually owns such a domain name and now wants to publish some
artifacts under that groupId?
They would have to control Apache DNS servers! :-)
Seriously though, I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum resolved FELIX-1487.
---
Resolution: Fixed
I have refactored the Parser to split-out a separate Tokenizer to help fix this
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1473?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum resolved FELIX-1473.
---
Resolution: Fixed
typing a period(.) after a command, forces reflective method invocation on
I've been trying to figure out some package versions for some geronimo code
today and think that, given an existing bundle and its next version, it's
pretty much beyond human capabilities to correctly determine the package
versions for the new bundle. Certainly I don't think anyone trying to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum resolved FELIX-1493.
---
Resolution: Fixed
I have added $argv which is always a non-null List and is not expanded
specially
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1474?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum resolved FELIX-1474.
---
Resolution: Fixed
This behaviour can now be disabled by setting the session variable
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum updated FELIX-1493:
--
Fix Version/s: gogo-0.6.0
[gogo] automatic expansion of $args in Closure stops direct access to $args
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1474?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum updated FELIX-1474:
--
Fix Version/s: gogo-0.6.0
[gogo] result of commands is implicitly written to pipe
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1473?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum updated FELIX-1473:
--
Fix Version/s: gogo-0.6.0
(was: gogo-0.4.0)
[gogo] The syntax does not provide
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-1487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Derek Baum updated FELIX-1487:
--
Fix Version/s: gogo-0.6.0
(was: gogo-0.4.0)
Support for commands on multiple
Comments inline...
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.orgwrote:
...
I agree that this isn't the most important topic in the world, but so far
the conversation has been pretty calm so I don't think the discussion has
given cause for concern.
For me, it comes
52 matches
Mail list logo
