+1 for a milestone-releaseand it seems like the vote passed ~ an hour ago.
On 29.03.24 12:50, Richard Zowalla wrote:
Hi all,
just to give a short additional note here:
We are currently waiting for a Johnzon 2.0.1 vote to pass [1], which I
expect to be the case after Eastern has passed.
If no one objects, I would like to start the process to get a milestone
release out of the "main" branch rather quickly (i.e. in the upcoming
week(s)) regardless of the outcome of the discussion in [2].
Are there any objections against it?
Gruß
Richard
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/ph2r1xkt8f5j4n9kdkoosqv3dw3chnzr
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/mh36qgdph4rrlpgd48oq5cvdlqr6t12r
Am Montag, dem 25.03.2024 um 10:44 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
Hello everyone,
Here is an update on the current progress of EE10, as the list has
been
a bit quiet for a few weeks now due to discussions on the lists of
our
dependencies.
We are currently blocked by the SNAPSHOT dependency towards BatchEE.
The good thing is that a VOTE for 1.0.4 is currently running and will
hopefully pass in the next few days, so we can move forward on our
side
and finally prepare a first milestone release of TomEE 10.
# Why 1.0.4 and not 2.0.0 (as it passed the EE10 Batch TCK)?
We have a chicken'n'egg problem on the BatchEE side with
TomEE/OpenEJB.
We cannot release BatchEE 2.0.0 without a TomEE 10 release artifact
to
avoid dependency ona SNAPSHOT. As TomEE 10 is CDI 4, we had to apply
a
fix in BatchEE 1.0.4 to be able to use the Jakarta relocated BatchEE
artifact. As soon as 1.0.4 is out, I will add that + a test to
"main".
# Next steps
Next steps (after the milestone release) will be (and might be a good
point for contributions):
- Set up the remaining TCKs + signature tests inside of TomEE
- If there is enough interest, there might be potential for
synchronized (remote) sessions here to bootstrap people in working on
it (see discussion on the user@ list)
- Get a picture of the current TCK status
- Start filling missing pieces with code or challenge obscure tests
;-)
We might also need to look into our dependencies (esp. CXF) to see,
if
we need to shift some resources into getting CXF 4.1.x out of the
door.
I know, that they are working hard on it.
Gruß
Richard
