I said I'd do an RC2 today but there are still some open JIRAs, the main
ones being TUSCANY-2480, TUSCANY-2484, and TUSCANY-2486. Whats the status
and ETA for fixes for these? Can i help with any of those, i've done work on
the ?wsdl endpoints in the past so could help with TUSCANY-2480 if its
needed?

   ...ant

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:02 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Following on from this there has been another problem found in 1.3 with the
> new generated wsdl - http://apache.markmail.org/message/fryloi6byuyjqvrlfor 
> which I've raised TUSCANY-2480, could someone take a look at that as I'm
> out the rest of the week otherwise i'll pick it up on Monday.
>
> What i think we should do is plan on having an RC2 next Tuesday which will
> give time for the two problems to be fixed with the hope that that is the
> final RC so we'd get the release officially out by the end of next week. For
> that to work RC2 needs to be good, i'm a bit worried about that as there's
> only been two people who have posted that they've reviewed RC1 so far. Be a
> shame if we need an RC3 because of a problem that could have been found in
> RC1 - if you have time please review:
> http://apache.markmail.org/message/fmlak6bfhentybf7
>
>    ...ant
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:36 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> An update on 1.3 for those watching this thread:
>>
>> - a release candidate is available for review at
>> http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/1.3-RC1a/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/1.3-RC1a/>with
>>  comments to this VOTE thread:
>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/fmlak6bfhentybf7
>>
>> - waiting for a final fix before making a new release candidate as
>> discussed in this thread:
>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/tuomadm4b3kubgjn
>>
>>    ...ant
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:29 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Quite a few updates to the 1.3 branch over night so it looks like we need
>>> a new RC1, here's what I think we should do:
>>>
>>> - I'm not sure if there are still things outstanding so I'll leave the
>>> 1.3 branch open for updates till tomorrow
>>> - tomorrow I'll re tag and respin RC1 and call a vote on that
>>> - after then the 1.3 branch goes to RTC so updates to trunk and raise a
>>> JIRA against 1.3 if you want a change in 1.3
>>> - plan on likely needing an RC2 early next week to fix any issues found
>>> in RC1
>>>
>>> This should get a 1.3 out late next week. We can have a 1.3.1 in the near
>>> future to pick up things that miss 1.3. Does this sound ok to everyone to
>>> get what they need in 1.3 or 1.3.1?
>>>
>>> In the meantime the distros at
>>> http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/1.3-RC1/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/1.3-RC1/>are
>>>  still useful for reviewing if anyone has the time and inclination.
>>>
>>>    ...ant
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 10:15 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is excellent help, thanks Yang.
>>>>
>>>> Note I've created a new RC1 distro which includes the correctly built
>>>> jars with out the shade plugin problem so that can be used to test the
>>>> standalone samples, see
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/1.3-RC1/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/1.3-RC1/>
>>>>
>>>> Will wait and see how things go today before deciding to call a vote on
>>>> that or spin a new RC before calling a vote - everyone, reviews of this RC
>>>> are welcome!
>>>>
>>>>    ...ant
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Sun Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Got it. I will retest them tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Yang Sun
>>>>>
>>>>> 2008/7/8 Feng Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,Sun
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Websphere, you must set application properties to use the
>>>>>> application class loader before the parent container class loader.
>>>>>> There is an explanation on the Sebastien's blog.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://jsdelfino.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-to-use-apache-tuscany-with.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Feng Wang
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2008-07-08 15:32:55,Sun Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >Hi, Simon:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >I did a test against Tomcat 5.5.26 and Websphere 6.1 with JDK 1.5
>>>>>> based on
>>>>>> >your package.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >The webapps in samples directory all passed the tests in Tomcat
>>>>>> 5.5.26.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >While in Websphere 6.1, the result is not good.
>>>>>> >calculator-webapp         pass
>>>>>> >feed-aggregator-webapp pass
>>>>>> >-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> >calculator-ws-webapp failed
>>>>>> >helloworld-ws-sdo-webapp failed
>>>>>> >The log trace is attached. I am guessing some class confliction
>>>>>> there.
>>>>>> >-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> >helloworld-dojo-webapp failed
>>>>>> >helloworld-jsonrpc-webapp failed
>>>>>> >No expected response. A screenshot for helloworld-dojo-webapp is
>>>>>> attached.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >Thanks,
>>>>>> >Yang Sun
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >2008/7/5 Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Sun Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> Hi, Simon:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> I am not sure whether it is a bit late. I can commit 1-2 hours/day
>>>>>> to help
>>>>>> >>> you do this testing (tomcat 5, websphere).
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> If you need my help, please reply me.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Regards,
>>>>>> >>> Yang Sun
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> 2008/7/2 Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Some more JIRA have been closed out but there are still some that
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> >>>> attention and remain unassigned. See the list at
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=12310210&fixfor=12313221&sorter/field=priority&sorter/order=DESC
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> The ones I see at the moment are...
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2409 - There is a
>>>>>> >>>> discussion thread on this (
>>>>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00433.html)
>>>>>> so I
>>>>>> >>>> would like to bring that to a conclusion ASAP.
>>>>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2417 - personally
>>>>>> I don't
>>>>>> >>>> think we need to reinstate auto port selection. If we can agree
>>>>>> this is an
>>>>>> >>>> easy fix
>>>>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2419 -
>>>>>> >>>> sample/helloworld-bpel needs some love
>>>>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2441 -
>>>>>> demo/xml-bigbank
>>>>>> >>>> also needs attention
>>>>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2442 - we need to
>>>>>> sort out
>>>>>> >>>> remaining references to incubator/ing
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Other things that need to be done.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Test the web apps on different containers. I need volunteers for
>>>>>> Tomcat5,
>>>>>> >>>> Geronimo, WebSphere
>>>>>> >>>> Do the legal checking
>>>>>> >>>> We need to either release the parent pom or fix the sca pom. I'm
>>>>>> waiting
>>>>>> >>>> for a reply from Ant as he made the suggestion re. fixing up the
>>>>>> sca pom.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> As before the release status summary is at
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/R1.3+Checklist
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> I'd like to get an RC for voting on before the end of this week.
>>>>>> All help
>>>>>> >>>> is gratefully received either fixing the things we know about
>>>>>> already or
>>>>>> >>>> looking at RC0 which is here
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> http://people.apache.org/~slaws/tuscany/1.3-RC0/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eslaws/tuscany/1.3-RC0/>
>>>>>> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eslaws/tuscany/1.3-RC0/>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Thanks
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Simon
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >> Great, thanks for the offer Sun. Am just about to post about RC1.
>>>>>> If you
>>>>>> >> find any issues raise a JIRA against 1.3
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thanks
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Simon
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to