Goga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I built this release last night, built clean.
-Original Message-
From: ant elder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 5:29 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release SDO 1.1.1
I'd like to get this voted
Message-
From: ant elder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 5:29 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release SDO 1.1.1
I'd like to get this voted on and released but nervous to start that
after
Kelvin had trouble getting the emf dependencies, could
I'd like to get this voted on and released but nervous to start that after
Kelvin had trouble getting the emf dependencies, could any one else try
building the tag and seeing if it works or not for them -
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/tags/java/sdo/1.1.1-RC2/-
its a small
Building in windows, with a clean repo :
Missing:
--
1) org.eclipse.emf:common:jar:2.2.3
Try downloading the file manually from the project website.
Then, install it using the command:
mvn install:install-file -DgroupId=org.eclipse.emf
-DartifactId=common -Dversion=2.2.3
It seems to work fine for me, the binary distribution ends up with a lib
folder containing:
backport-util-concurrent-3.0.jar
codegen-2.2.3.jar
codegen-ecore-2.2.3.jar
common-2.2.3.jar
ecore-2.2.3.jar
ecore-change-2.2.3.jar
ecore-xmi-2.2.3.jar
sample-sdo-1.1.1.jar
stax-api-1.0.1.jar
I've made all the changes required in the tag [1] to get rid of the felix
jars, find and include the emf jars, and I've removed the incubating tag,
DISCLAIMER files etc. However, I'm currently stumped as to why two emf
jars available [2] and [3] don't get downloaded by the build. The build
Did you try the workaround I mentioned before on this thread [1] where
I added a new repository ? It was actually for other jars, but might
help in this case as well...
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg31727.html
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 4:56 AM, kelvin goodson [EMAIL
Hi Luciano,
yes, I added that workaround, and that satisfied most of the EMF jars,
but not these two. It's odd, the 2 jars we need are there in the repository
you suggested, but maven will not download them.
Kelvin.
2008/6/6 Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Did you try the workaround I
Did you try mvn -U ?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 10:18 AM, kelvin goodson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Luciano,
yes, I added that workaround, and that satisfied most of the EMF jars,
but not these two. It's odd, the 2 jars we need are there in the repository
you suggested, but maven will not
The required libraries are
sample-sdo-%RELEASE%.jar
sdo-api-r2.1-%RELEASE%.jar
tuscany-sdo-lib-%RELEASE%.jar
tuscany-sdo-impl-%RELEASE%.jar
tuscany-sdo-tools-%RELEASE%.jar
codegen-ecore-2.2.3.jar
codegen-2.2.3.jar
ecore-2.2.3.jar
ecore-change-2.2.3.jar
ecore-xmi-2.2.3.jar
common-2.2.3.jar
The felix jars were introduced in the fix for SDO does not work with OSGi
[1] in commit 620763 [2]. I don't know if this is expected behaviour, not
being an OSGI expert. Comments anyone?
Kelvin.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1293
[2]
I had an offline chat with Rajini. It seems we need just the framework jar
of felix in the distro, but if the dependency on felix is declared as test
scope in the pom, then that jar is not available to main phase of the
build. If its not declared as test scope then we get 5 felix jars in the
Adding an exclude for felix to the distribution pom can fix that, eg here's
local changes i have just tried:
Index: src/main/assembly/bin.xml
===
--- src/main/assembly/bin.xml (revision 662488)
+++ src/main/assembly/bin.xml
Just a thought, would I be right in guessing that if ever our
SdoBundleActivator is touched in the runtime, then the environment would be
expected to provide the classes to satisfy
import org.osgi.framework.BundleActivator;
import org.osgi.framework.BundleContext;
?
in which case I think
That sounds right to me.
...ant
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:57 AM, kelvin goodson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Just a thought, would I be right in guessing that if ever our
SdoBundleActivator is touched in the runtime, then the environment would
be
expected to provide the classes to satisfy
Thanks Ant, that looks like progress, but the felix framework jar is now
not in the list of distributed jars.
Kelvin.
2008/6/3 ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Adding an exclude for felix to the distribution pom can fix that, eg here's
local changes i have just tried:
Index:
OK, I think I have everything I need now to respin this RC. I'm inclined
to take the opportunity to remove the incubating tag on this release
whilst I'm fixing up the poms.
Kelvin.
2008/6/3 ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
That sounds right to me.
...ant
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:57 AM,
Sounds good to me.
...ant
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 1:03 PM, kelvin goodson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
OK, I think I have everything I need now to respin this RC. I'm inclined
to take the opportunity to remove the incubating tag on this release
whilst I'm fixing up the poms.
Kelvin.
Kelvin,
Sorry about the delay in getting back to you - I can see that you have found
a solution. Yes, you are absolutely right, the felix framework should use
scope provided since SdoBundleActivator is only used when SDO is running
inside an OSGi container, and the framework classes are provided
I have pinned down the change that caused the absence of EMF jars in the
distribution zip to be the switch from the maven assembly plugin version
2.2-SNAPSHOT to the 2.2-beta-2 as altered here [1].I hope to look at
this again soon, but have to stop for now. If anyone has any views on what
This failure also occurs with the 2.1 version and the 2.2-beta-1 version.
The current trunk version is 2.2-beta-3-SNAPSHOT, which I haven't found in
a repository yet, so the only version that seems ever to have worked is the
2.2-SNAPSHOT version. I have taken a look at the assembly plugin JIRAs,
It is strange.
Removing the includes at the bottom of the assembly bin.xml changes it so
that the dependencies do get included again, but several felix dependencies
also get dragged in. What is the complete list of jars that should be
included?
...ant
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 6:02 PM, kelvin
I'm looking at fixing a problem wrt running the samples at the moment.
Also, I found that with a combination of using IBM JDK 1.5 and maven 2.0.7 I
got hit by http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MJAVADOC-135 when trying to build
from the top. We say in our BUILDING doc that 2.0.7 is OK, perhaps if
I have tried to build the source distribution with a clean maven repo,
and I was getting errors:
[INFO]
[ERROR] FATAL ERROR
[INFO]
[INFO] Failed to
Please review and vote on the SDO 1.1.1 release.
The artifacts including binary and source distributions, staging maven repo
and release notes are available at
http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/.
The only difference
25 matches
Mail list logo
