Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Hi John! I've now found a bit time to investigate OWB-2 behaviour in DeltaSpike. I'm now down to just a few tests and they all seems to be caused by different behaviour of arquillian. There is a test which checks that a resource must only be served a single time from the ClassPath. In this

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Oh yes, Mark changed something about it and the default scanning mode of CDI doesn't help. Maybe we need to just ignore the classes explicitly Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Ok, so I started to add the missing dependencies, that's not going to work. In scheduler I added log4j then it complained about some terracotta class. I think there's a regression in the arquillian adapter, specifically how it handles classes that may not be present. On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

IncompatibleClassChangeError, classpath is probably corrupted with an owb 1.0 dependency somehow Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Oh txs for the catch, will check. LieGrue, Strub > Am 19.06.2017 um 04:47 schrieb John D. Ament : > > Hmm so DeltaSpike is seeing 11 test failures with OWB2. > >

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Hmm so DeltaSpike is seeing 11 test failures with OWB2. https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/DeltaSpike/job/DeltaSpike%20OWB%202.0.0/lastCompletedBuild/testReport/ CDI Ctrl Servlet - it looks like a weird error, the impl of this bean hasn't been changed in 2 years. Not sure if this is a new

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

OWB itself did always ignore it and log a warning. This code did not get changed for a while. But we have/had a bug in the arquillian connector which lead to blowing up on NoClassDefFound. I need to check whether we fixed this already with another commit. The ticket is

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Just wondering, did you change the behavior when a class isn't found to ignore the bean? Prior versions of OWB would throw an exception. John On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 4:43 PM Mark Struberg wrote: > Yes, it should 'just work' afaict. > We even kept the SPI the same. >

RE: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

17, 2017 13:43 > To: openwebbeans-user <u...@openwebbeans.apache.org> > Cc: openwebbeans-dev <dev@openwebbeans.apache.org> > Subject: Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon > > Yes, it should 'just work' afaict. > We even kept the SPI the same. > We most likely will

RE: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

From: Mark Struberg [mailto:strub...@yahoo.de] Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 13:43 To: openwebbeans-user <u...@openwebbeans.apache.org> Cc: openwebbeans-dev <dev@openwebbeans.apache.org> Subject: Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon Yes, it should 'just work' afaict. We even kept the SPI th

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

sounds great! i'm going to test the snapshot soon. regards, gerhard 2017-06-17 22:43 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg : > Yes, it should 'just work' afaict. > We even kept the SPI the same. > We most likely will add an async event related API for better integration > within

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Yes, it should 'just work' afaict. We even kept the SPI the same. We most likely will add an async event related API for better integration within TomEE in the future. But this should still be perfectly backward compatible as OWB will provide a default implementation anyway! If you catch any

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

So... just to confirm. Outside of changing the geronimo specs, taking a OWB 1.x profile that I may have will just work with OWB 2? John On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM Mark Struberg wrote: > Yes, it is 1:1 backward compatible. > > The only thing you need to update

Re: OWB-2.0.0 to be released soon

Do we want to release meecrowave in the same shot? Le 17 juin 2017 19:53, "Mark Struberg" a écrit : > Yes, it is 1:1 backward compatible. > > The only thing you need to update is the jcdi and common-annotations API: > > > org.apache.geronimo.specs >