So thats works ok for two, doesn't work for one. Luciano, I had to build a couple of times with -U to get all the emf jars successfully downloaded, have you tried that or can you find any other way to get a build through in your environment?
...ant On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Murtaza 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 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-R > C2/-<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/tags/java/sdo/1.1.1-RC2/-> > its a small checkout and doesn't take long to build. > > ...ant > > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 9:15 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > 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 > > tuscany-sdo-api-r2.1-1.1.1.jar > > tuscany-sdo-impl-1.1.1.jar > > tuscany-sdo-lib-1.1.1.jar > > tuscany-sdo-tools-1.1.1.jar > > wstx-asl-3.2.1.jar > > xsd-2.2.3.jar > > > > I've put the distributions that I get from the 1.1.1-RC2 tag up at > > > http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC2<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC2> > <http://people.a > pache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC2>, > > how do they look? > > > > ...ant > > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:18 PM, 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 download them. > >> > >> Kelvin. > >> > >> 2008/6/6 Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > 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 PROTECTED]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > 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 > >> > > output complains about URLs that, if cut and pasted into a > browser, > >> work > >> > > fine. Any clues to explain this odd maven behaviour are welcome. > >> > > > >> > > Kelvin > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > [1] > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/tags/java/sdo/1.1.1-R > C2/<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/tags/java/sdo/1.1.1-RC2/> > >> > > [2] > >> > > > >> > > >> > http://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/eclipse/modeling/emf/emf/maven2/org/eclipse/emf/c > odegen/2.2.3/<http://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/eclipse/modeling/emf/emf/maven2/org/eclipse/emf/codegen/2.2.3/> > >> > > [3] > >> > > > >> > > >> > http://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/eclipse/modeling/emf/emf/maven2/org/eclipse/emf/c > odegen-ecore/2.2.3/<http://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/eclipse/modeling/emf/emf/maven2/org/eclipse/emf/codegen-ecore/2.2.3/> > >> > > > >> > > 2008/6/3 Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > > > >> > >> 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 > by > >> the > >> > >> container. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 6/3/08, 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 > >> > >> > > >> > >> > import org.osgi.framework.BundleActivator; > >> > >> > import org.osgi.framework.BundleContext; > >> > >> > > >> > >> > ? > >> > >> > > >> > >> > in which case I think declaring a "provided" scope for the > felix > >> > >> dependency > >> > >> > would be the right way to do things > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Kelvin. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > 2008/6/3 kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > 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: src/main/assembly/bin.xml > >> > >> > >> > >> =================================================================== > >> > >> > >> --- src/main/assembly/bin.xml (revision 662488) > >> > >> > >> +++ src/main/assembly/bin.xml (working copy) > >> > >> > >> @@ -120,13 +120,13 @@ > >> > >> > >> <dependencySets> > >> > >> > >> <dependencySet> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> <outputDirectory>tuscany-sdo-${sdo.version}/lib</outputDirectory> > >> > >> > >> - <includes> > >> > >> > >> - > >> > >> > >> > <include>org.apache.tuscany.sdo:tuscany-sdo-api-r2.1</include> > >> > >> > >> + <!-- includes> > >> > >> > >> + > >> > >> > >> > <include>org.apache.tuscany.sdo:tuscany-sdo-api-r2.1</include> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > <include>org.apache.tuscany.sdo:tuscany-sdo-lib</include> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > <include>org.apache.tuscany.sdo:tuscany-sdo-impl</include> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> <include>org.apache.tuscany.sdo:tuscany-sdo-tools</include> > >> > >> > >> > >> > <include>org.apache.tuscany.sdo:sample-sdo</include> > >> > >> > >> - </includes> > >> > >> > >> + </includes --> > >> > >> > >> <fileMode>0644</fileMode> > >> > >> > >> </dependencySet> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Index: pom.xml > >> > >> > >> > >> =================================================================== > >> > >> > >> --- pom.xml (revision 662488) > >> > >> > >> +++ pom.xml (working copy) > >> > >> > >> @@ -56,6 +56,12 @@ > >> > >> > >> <groupId>org.apache.tuscany.sdo</groupId> > >> > >> > >> <artifactId>tuscany-sdo-impl</artifactId> > >> > >> > >> <version>${pom.version}</version> > >> > >> > >> + <exclusions> > >> > >> > >> + <exclusion> > >> > >> > >> + <groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId> > >> > >> > >> + > >> <artifactId>org.apache.felix.main</artifactId> > >> > >> > >> + </exclusion> > >> > >> > >> + </exclusions> > >> > >> > >> </dependency> > >> > >> > >> <dependency> > >> > >> > >> <groupId>org.apache.tuscany.sdo</groupId> > >> > >> > >> @@ -67,6 +73,7 @@ > >> > >> > >> <artifactId>sample-sdo</artifactId> > >> > >> > >> <version>${pom.version}</version> > >> > >> > >> </dependency> > >> > >> > >> + > >> > >> > >> </dependencies> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> <build> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Which results in a lib directory 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-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar > >> > >> > >> stax-api-1.0.1.jar > >> > >> > >> tuscany-sdo-api-r2.1-1.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar > >> > >> > >> tuscany-sdo-impl-1.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar > >> > >> > >> tuscany-sdo-lib-1.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar > >> > >> > >> tuscany-sdo-tools-1.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar > >> > >> > >> wstx-asl-3.2.1.jar > >> > >> > >> xsd-2.2.3.jar > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ...ant > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:31 AM, kelvin goodson < > >> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > 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 > >> > >> > >> > binary distro. Rajini's going to take a look when she > gets > >> some > >> > >> time. > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > Kelvin. > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > 2008/6/3 kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> 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] http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=620763 > >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> 2008/6/3 kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> 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 > >> > >> > >> >>> xsd-2.2.3.jar > >> > >> > >> >>> stax-api-1.0.1.jar > >> > >> > >> >>> wstx-asl-3.2.0.jar > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> with > >> > >> > >> >>> backport-util-concurrent being optional if you want > >> threadsafe > >> > >> > >> >>> collections with Java 1.4 IIRC > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> The felix jar inclusions were introduced some time > between > >> > commit > >> > >> > >> level > >> > >> > >> >>> 600913 and 627754; I'm working on narrowing this down > at > >> the > >> > >> > moment. > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> Kelvin. > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> 2008/6/2 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> 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 goodson < > >> > >> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > 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, > >> > >> > >> >>>> > but > >> > >> > >> >>>> > it's hard to trawl that since so many JIRAs > reference the > >> > word > >> > >> > >> >>>> dependency. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > It's not clear to me whether we benefited from a > freak > >> bug > >> > that > >> > >> > was > >> > >> > >> to > >> > >> > >> >>>> our > >> > >> > >> >>>> > advantage in the 2.2-SNAPSHOT version or whether all > the > >> > other > >> > >> > >> >>>> versions > >> > >> > >> >>>> > have > >> > >> > >> >>>> > a bug/bugs. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > Kelvin. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > 2008/6/2 kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > 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 > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > version we should be using please pipe up. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > Kelvin. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > [1] > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sdo/pom.xml?r1=62869 > 1&r2=642349&pathrev=642349&diff_format=h<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sdo/pom.xml?r1=628691&r2=642349&pathrev=642349&diff_format=h> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > Kelvin. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > 2008/5/19 kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > 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-135when > >> > >> > >> >>>> trying > >> > >> > >> >>>> > to > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> build from the top. We say in our BUILDING doc > that > >> > 2.0.7 > >> > >> is > >> > >> > >> OK, > >> > >> > >> >>>> > perhaps > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> if we need to respin we should raise that in > order to > >> > avoid > >> > >> > IBM > >> > >> > >> JDK > >> > >> > >> >>>> > users > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> hitting this issue. It's fine with 2.0.9 > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> Kelvin. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> 2008/5/18 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> 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/> > <http://people. > apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> > <http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> > >> < > >> > >> > http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> > >> > >> > <http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> > >> > >> >>>> < > >> http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > < > >> > http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> < > >> > >> http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/sdo/1.1.1-RC1/ > >> > >> > >. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> The only difference between this and the 1.1 > release > >> is > >> > the > >> > >> > fix > >> > >> > >> >>>> for > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2240. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> +1 from me. > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> ...ant > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > > >> > >> > >> >>>> > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Thank you... > >> > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> > >> > >> Rajini > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Luciano Resende > >> > Apache Tuscany Committer > >> > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>< > http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > < > >> http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > >> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > >> > > >> > > > > >
