We have done some test here with the tranql SQLServer 2000 and 2005 XA connector (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4279), and TranQL Informix XA connector (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4365), both look good. So they should be ready to get into Geronimo 2.1.4.
Still trying with the TranQL connector for Oracle RAC - not easy to set up the environment... -Jack 2009/2/6 Jarek Gawor <jga...@gmail.com> > Jay, > > Updating OpenEJB 3.0.1 to xbean 3.5 will require 2.0.3 and 2.1.4 to > update the asm 3.1 library (and that will need even more changes). I > know some other libs have deps on the asm lib so we might run into > problems later on. > > How about we only upgrade xbean-naming to 3.5 first and leave other > xbean dependencies on 3.4.1? If that doesn't work we can try 3.5 for > everything. > > Jarek > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Jay D. McHugh <jaydmch...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > All of the 2.0.3 build issues are fixed. > > > > I will try building 2.0.3 with XBeans 3.5 now and let you all know what > > happens. > > > > If it will build, then I might take a look to see whether I can figure > > out what changes are necessary for OpenEJB 3.0.1 to use XBeans 3.5 too. > > > > Jay > > > > Jay D. McHugh wrote: > >> The problem is with the version of ASM that is brought in when using a > >> higher version of XBeans. > >> > >> OpenEJB is using a method that has been removed: > >> org.objectweb.asm.ClassReader.accept > >> > >> And Geronimo (already - not counting XBeans 3.5) is using classes that > >> have been removed: > >> LinkResolver > >> UniqueDefaultLinkResolver > >> > >> Jay > >> > >> Joe Bohn wrote: > >>> Thanks for the info Jay and for doing some more digging. > >>> > >>> I don't really have a strong desire to push everything to xBean 3.5. I > >>> was just trying to eliminate the use of multiple xBean versions as this > >>> could potentially cause problems (and confusion) for our users. > >>> > >>> It looks like we originally moved up to xBean 3.5 (actually > >>> 3.5-SNAPSHOT) to resolve a jca context issue (Geronimo-4375). However, > >>> it looks like it was soon discovered that there were issues with the > >>> OpenEJB, ASM and xBean versions in G. As a result ... we ended up > >>> reverting back to an older ASM and xBean 3.3 for finder and reflect > >>> while keeping the newer xbean-naming 3.5 so that the original issue was > >>> still resolved. That seems to be working and is perhaps the best > >>> approach. I was just concerned about using the various xBean versions > >>> in our Geronimo 2.1.4 server. Perhaps using the various xBean versions > >>> is still the best thing to do here. I didn't realize that there were > >>> core issues in OpenEJB attempting to use anything greater than 3.4.1. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Joe > >>> > >>> > >>> Jay D. McHugh wrote: > >>>> Hey everyone, > >>>> > >>>> If we want to get OpenEJB 3.0.1 to move up to XBeans 3.5, then I think > >>>> that we'll need to chip in to resolve the problems that pop up when > you > >>>> use a version greater than 3.4.1. > >>>> > >>>> That was the highest version (available at the time) that could be > used > >>>> in the OpenEJB 3.0 branch without causing errors. > >>>> > >>>> I'll try switching to XBeans 3.5 (after the build I am in the middle > of > >>>> finishes) and let you all know if it goes through cleanly. > >>>> > >>>> My feeling is that it won't though. > >>>> > >>>> Also, I have been trying to get a 'final' Geronimo 2.0.x release put > >>>> together and will need OpenEJB 3.0.1 for that (3.0 no longer builds > >>>> because the artifacts for XBeans changed groupIds). > >>>> > >>>> Jay > >>>> > >>>> Joe Bohn wrote: > >>>>> I was relaying the information second-hand ... so it's very possible > I > >>>>> got it wrong. > >>>>> > >>>>> It looks like there is a dependency xBean in OpenEJB ... but it's > 3.4.1 > >>>>> rather than 3.3 (as we have in the branches/2.1). So, perhaps if we > can > >>>>> convince OpenEJB 3.0.x to xBean 3.5 we can then make the references > >>>>> consistent in our 2.1 branch. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Joe > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Donald Woods wrote: > >>>>>> I don't see any dependencies on Xbean in OpenJPA 1.0.x or 1.2.x. > >>>>>> Maybe you're thinking about OpenEJB? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -Donald > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Joe Bohn wrote: > >>>>>>> I agree we should get a 2.1.4 release out ... and you certainly > have > >>>>>>> my vote for release manager! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The only thing I would add to the list is to get our xBean > references > >>>>>>> to a consistent versions. I noticed this as I was updating > >>>>>>> branches/2.1 and trunk to pull in the newly released xBean 3.5. In > >>>>>>> branches/2.1 we have a mix of 3.3 dependencies (finder and reflect) > >>>>>>> and 3.5 dependencies (naming). I've been told that this was due to > >>>>>>> OpenJPA dependencies on 3.3. Now that we are pulling in a new > >>>>>>> OpenJPA release we will hopefully be able to update everything to > use > >>>>>>> xBean 3.5. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Joe > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Jarek Gawor wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I think it's time for Geronimo 2.1.4 release. We've had a lot of > >>>>>>>> important fixes since 2.1.3 and we should get them out to our > users. > >>>>>>>> And if we agree, I would also like to volunteer to be a release > >>>>>>>> manager for this release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Looking at the current status for 2.1.4 there are still a few > things > >>>>>>>> that we need to do before we can go ahead with the release. I > updated > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxPMGT/Geronimo+2.1.4+Release+Status > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> page with some of these items. If there are any open bugs that > _need_ > >>>>>>>> to be fixed for 2.1.4 or if I missed anything in that list please > >>>>>>>> just > >>>>>>>> update that wiki page. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> Jarek > >>>>>>>> > > >
