I also think all the osgi imported packages should have a version range up to the next major version. Currently, those are defined as unbounded range up to infinity is problematic if we have in the future a new incompatible major version.
Also, I wonder if the org.apache.geronimo.osgi.registry.api package is really optional ? Will the specs still be usable if this package is not present at all ? On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 20:46, Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Have the specs jars been tested in both a non osgi environment and an osgi > environment ? > Also, i'd like to have the scripting api and rest api osgi-fied the same > way. We'd need them in servicemix, and given you have rewritten the specs > to support osgi, i don't see the need to maintain the servicemix ones > anymore. > Also, I think there is an unresolved JIRA issue (GERONIMO-3960) about the > imported packages (they should not import their own packages). > > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 19:30, Rick McGuire <rick...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If we wish to release a milestone soon, we need to start getting the >> different subcomponents released fairly quickly. Here are the things I >> believe we need to have release votes on: >> >> 1) New spec components. These need to be done first, and should probably >> done as a single vote rather than trying to schedule a vote for each of the >> jars. >> 2) New javamail jar (should probably done concurrently with the javamail >> spec). >> 3) New xmlbeans schema jar releases (java ee 1.4, java ee 5, and java ee >> 6 versions) >> 4) New components jars >> 5) New yoko jars >> 6) New tomcat ext jars >> >> For 1), I think these are ready to go. I believe the issue of the package >> exports has been resolved as far as it can be for the 3.1 M1 release. The >> jpa and servlet specs will be exporting dual version levels because the need >> to line up with different implementations that are not conforming to the >> OSGi specs yet. This seems like a workable solution, at least for the short >> term. I believe all of our specs are currently passing the signature tests, >> so they look clean there. If I don't hear any objections, I'll start >> staging these for release tomorrow morning. >> >> The one spec there might be a concern about is the ccpp spec jar. This is >> used in the pluto support currently, but we don't currently have a TCK to >> validate this one. I need some opinions on how to proceed with that jar. >> For now, I'll not be submitting this one for a vote with the rest of the >> specs. >> >> What state are the rest of these in? I suspect yoko is not stable enough >> currently since David Jencks is currently working on getting the Corba >> support working. We might want to delay the tomcat external release as long >> as we can in case we require some patches. "As long as we can" is probably >> not more than a week. The xmlbeans schema jars are probably pretty stable >> and capable of being released now. >> >> Are the components in any shape that release votes can be started? Here >> are the components we need to release: >> >> - geronimo-connector >> - geronmo-transaction >> - geronimo-jaspi >> >> This will need to be handled fairly soon too. >> >> Rick >> >> > > > -- > Cheers, > Guillaume Nodet > ------------------------ > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > ------------------------ > Open Source SOA > http://fusesource.com > > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
