Hi Am 31.10.2012 um 21:31 schrieb David Jencks:
> DS 1.2: AFAIK we've completely implemented the DS 1.2 spec. Excellent. > I don't really understand the location binding and targeted PID bits. It comes from the Configuration Admin spec and must be replicate in SCR since we basically act like a Configuration Admin service (the configuration provisioning part) towards the components. I think we can live without this for the 1.6.2 relase. > > Java 5: I'm certainly happy with not temporarily removing the java 5-isms, > but I could still do it if anyone else asks. I havent' done any basic > housekeeping like removing the pre-java-5 concurrency compatibility code. I > have no strong feeling about releasing with or without this stuff. Ok, lets release with this cruft in and cleanup after the release. I just started a thread on the users list asking for opinions regarding our itended use to just use Java 5 features and API going forward. Regards Felix > > thanks! > david jencks > > On Oct 31, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Am 31.10.2012 um 19:54 schrieb David Jencks: >> >>> I updated the changelog from the svn log.... hopefully I didn't miss >>> anything. >> >> Just updated the changelog from the JIRA release notes. >> >> Another question crossing my mind: Since the current state passes the most >> recent CT and checking the changes section in the 4.3 compendium spec I >> would assume this version also implements Version 1.2 of the DS spec. >> Correct ? >> >> The only thing not fully implemented for the most recent specs is support >> for the most recent Configuration Admin features like relaxed location >> binding and targetted PIDs. I can live with that. >> >> Regards >> Felix >> >>> >>> waiting for advice on the other two questions.... >>> >>> thanks >>> david jencks >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:44 AM, David Jencks wrote: >>> >>>> At the moment the code uses some java 5. How important is it that this >>>> release not require java 5? It would not be very difficult to remove the >>>> java 5-isms and put them back after the release. >>>> >>>> I've been marking defects as applying to and fixed in scr-1.8.0. I guess >>>> we should go back and change them to 1.6.2? >>>> >>>> I have not been maintaining the changelog.... that will be a bit of work. >>>> >>>> If I don't discover any giant problems before we get the above done I'm >>>> fine with a release. >>>> >>>> thanks >>>> david jencks >>>> >>>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 3:05 AM, Felix Meschberger wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I see the current trunk build passes our own as well as the OSGi CT tests >>>>> and there are no open issues marked with 1.6.2. >>>>> >>>>> Shall I go ahead and cut a release ? >>>>> >>>>> This would IMHO also enable David to continue his refactorings. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Felix >>>> >>> >> >
