Re: OWB Release Lifecycle
Or *really* minor (bug fix releases) like 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3, etc. So I see the options as being some number (4 was mentioned and sounds reasonable to me) of releases of the following (type) possibilities: 1. X.0.0 (Major version releases) 2. 0.X.0 (Minor releases) 3. 0.0.X (Minor maintenance releases) I think multiple type (1) releases would be too aggressive and disruptive. I think all four being type (3) releases is too low a bar. So I'd vote for 4 releases per year that targets at most one type (1) and three type (3) releases and between zero and four type (2) releases. Or do we consider type (3) to be so minor as to be uncounted? (so total of 4 where: ((type (1) <= 1) and (0 <= type (2) <= 4))) Paul J. Reder On 10/21/2010 08:16 PM, Rohit Kelapure wrote: Does 4 releases mean four major releases like 1.0.0, 2.0.0, 3.0.0 or minor ones like 1.1.0, 1.2.0et al --Thanks, Rohit On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Gurkan Erdogduwrote: Hi; OpenEJB has been discussing release lifecycle! I think we can also discuss it for OWB. What do you think about the release cycle for OWB? From my perspective, - 4 - release in one year is fantastico! But we also think about maintenance releases! Thanks; Gurkan -- Paul J. Reder --- "The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it. Only if every single citizen feels duty bound to do his share in this defense are the constitutional rights secure." -- Albert Einstein
[jira] Created: (OWB-481) WebBeansConfigurationListener implementing ServletContextListener is not likely to work
WebBeansConfigurationListener implementing ServletContextListener is not likely to work --- Key: OWB-481 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-481 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Bug Reporter: David Jencks Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu Currently WebBeansConfigurationListener implements ServletContextListener and uses the contextInitialized method to initialize OWB for the web app. Given an application containing a ServletContextListener that is a web bean, this requires that 1. the OWB WebBeansConfigurationListener ServletContextListener get installed before the app's ServletContextListeners 2. the OWB WebBeansConfigurationListener have it's contextInitialized called before the servlet container instantiates the apps ServletContextListeners that are web beans. There's no way to guarantee this will happen in a compliant servlet container. (Neither happens in the geronimo tomcat integration; we could force the first to happen, but not the second). It might be possible to do the initialization in a ServletContainerInitializer since I think these get called before any application classes start getting instantiated. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: OWB Release Lifecycle
Does 4 releases mean four major releases like 1.0.0, 2.0.0, 3.0.0 or minor ones like 1.1.0, 1.2.0et al --Thanks, Rohit On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu wrote: > Hi; > > OpenEJB has been discussing release lifecycle! I think we can also discuss > it > for OWB. What do you think about the release cycle for OWB? > > > From my perspective, - 4 - release in one year is fantastico! But we also > think > about maintenance releases! > > Thanks; > > Gurkan > > >
[jira] Commented: (OWB-480) Avoid a couple NPEs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12923698#action_12923698
]
David Jencks commented on OWB-480:
--
The current OWB strategy is to use the thread context classloader to look for
META-INF/openwebbeans.properties files, and if there is none use the
openwebbeans-impl jar's classloader.
In a reasonable app server (despite the problems I ran into not currently
including geronimo I think) the application or thread context classloader is
not going to expose the OWB classes to the application, so any OWB.properties
files in OWB itself won't get picked up. You'll only get any that happen to be
in the application itself. While allowing customization of a particular app in
this way might be reasonable requiring it for every app as the complete OWB
configuration certainly isn't.
in an osgi environment, the alternative of using the OWB-impl jar classloader
is only going to give you the OWB.properties file actually in OWB-impl.jar.
As a result of these problems currently geronimo is configuring OWB using code
like
OpenWebBeansConfiguration.getInstance().setProperty("foo", "bar");
> Avoid a couple NPEs
> ---
>
> Key: OWB-480
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480
> Project: OpenWebBeans
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
>Affects Versions: 1.1.0
>Reporter: David Jencks
>Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu
> Attachments: OWB-480.patch
>
>
> I've found 2 possible NPE;s:
> 1. in an OSGI environment, its quite possible that no openwebbeans.properties
> files will be located, so you get a null properties object and
> OpenWebBeansConfiguration will have a null Properties leading to big problems.
> 2. in WebContainerLifecycle, the claim that it's a jsp app by configuration
> might be wrong. If there's no jsp factory, no need to throw an NPE.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: OWB Release Lifecycle
Yes, 4 sounds great! +1 from me too. Regards, Jakob 2010/10/21 Gerhard : > +1 > > regards, > gerhard > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > 2010/10/21 Gurkan Erdogdu > >> Hi; >> >> OpenEJB has been discussing release lifecycle! I think we can also discuss >> it >> for OWB. What do you think about the release cycle for OWB? >> >> >> From my perspective, - 4 - release in one year is fantastico! But we also >> think >> about maintenance releases! >> >> Thanks; >> >> Gurkan >> >> >> > -- Jakob Korherr blog: http://www.jakobk.com twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr work: http://www.irian.at
[jira] Updated: (OWB-480) Avoid a couple NPEs
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] David Jencks updated OWB-480: - Attachment: OWB-480.patch fix for the 2 NPEs > Avoid a couple NPEs > --- > > Key: OWB-480 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480 > Project: OpenWebBeans > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core >Affects Versions: 1.1.0 >Reporter: David Jencks >Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu > Attachments: OWB-480.patch > > > I've found 2 possible NPE;s: > 1. in an OSGI environment, its quite possible that no openwebbeans.properties > files will be located, so you get a null properties object and > OpenWebBeansConfiguration will have a null Properties leading to big problems. > 2. in WebContainerLifecycle, the claim that it's a jsp app by configuration > might be wrong. If there's no jsp factory, no need to throw an NPE. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OWB-480) Avoid a couple NPEs
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12923639#action_12923639 ] Mark Struberg commented on OWB-480: --- agree with 2. But we always provide a openwebbeans.properties in webbeans-impl.jar. We just rely on it to know which SPI Impls we should use. Which part is not correct in guessing this? > Avoid a couple NPEs > --- > > Key: OWB-480 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480 > Project: OpenWebBeans > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core >Affects Versions: 1.1.0 >Reporter: David Jencks >Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu > > I've found 2 possible NPE;s: > 1. in an OSGI environment, its quite possible that no openwebbeans.properties > files will be located, so you get a null properties object and > OpenWebBeansConfiguration will have a null Properties leading to big problems. > 2. in WebContainerLifecycle, the claim that it's a jsp app by configuration > might be wrong. If there's no jsp factory, no need to throw an NPE. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Created: (OWB-480) Avoid a couple NPEs
Avoid a couple NPEs --- Key: OWB-480 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-480 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Bug Components: Core Affects Versions: 1.1.0 Reporter: David Jencks Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu I've found 2 possible NPE;s: 1. in an OSGI environment, its quite possible that no openwebbeans.properties files will be located, so you get a null properties object and OpenWebBeansConfiguration will have a null Properties leading to big problems. 2. in WebContainerLifecycle, the claim that it's a jsp app by configuration might be wrong. If there's no jsp factory, no need to throw an NPE. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: OWB Release Lifecycle
+1 regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/10/21 Gurkan Erdogdu > Hi; > > OpenEJB has been discussing release lifecycle! I think we can also discuss > it > for OWB. What do you think about the release cycle for OWB? > > > From my perspective, - 4 - release in one year is fantastico! But we also > think > about maintenance releases! > > Thanks; > > Gurkan > > >
[jira] Created: (OWB-479) detect loops in producer beans vs. producer method parameters at deployment time
detect loops in producer beans vs. producer method parameters at deployment time Key: OWB-479 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-479 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Improvement Components: Injection and Lookup Affects Versions: 1.0.0 Reporter: Eric Covener Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu Priority: Minor Currently OWB can cause a stack overflow if a parameter on a producer method is satisfied by the same bean as the producer method itself, it would be nice if we could trap such a thing in producer beans at deployment time and minimally warn about the offending method/parameter. at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.getInjectableReference(BeanManagerImpl.java:723) at org.apache.webbeans.inject.AbstractInjectable.inject(AbstractInjectable.java:134) at org.apache.webbeans.inject.InjectableMethods.doInjection(InjectableMethods.java:117) at org.apache.webbeans.component.ProducerMethodBean.createDefaultInstance(ProducerMethodBean.java:193) at org.apache.webbeans.component.ProducerMethodBean.createInstance(ProducerMethodBean.java:155) at org.apache.webbeans.component.AbstractOwbBean.createNewInstance(AbstractOwbBean.java:208) at org.apache.webbeans.portable.creation.AbstractProducer.produce(AbstractProducer.java:82) at org.apache.webbeans.component.InjectionTargetWrapper.produce(InjectionTargetWrapper.java:142) at org.apache.webbeans.component.AbstractOwbBean.create(AbstractOwbBean.java:166) at org.apache.webbeans.context.DependentContext.getInstance(DependentContext.java:69) at org.apache.webbeans.context.AbstractContext.get(AbstractContext.java:191) at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.getReference(BeanManagerImpl.java:839) at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.getInjectableReference(BeanManagerImpl.java:723) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
OWB Release Lifecycle
Hi; OpenEJB has been discussing release lifecycle! I think we can also discuss it for OWB. What do you think about the release cycle for OWB? From my perspective, - 4 - release in one year is fantastico! But we also think about maintenance releases! Thanks; Gurkan
Re: svn commit: r1025914 - /openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml
Hi folks! I just updated the checkstyle config in our build-tools to be compatible with the maven-checkstyle-plugin-2.6. This is needed for maven-3 compatibility [1] PLEASE: test the OWB build with maven-3. If all looks well, I'll go on and release our buildtools-1.0.1. LieGrue, strub [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/MAVEN/maven-3x-plugin-compatibility-matrix.html --- On Thu, 10/21/10, strub...@apache.org wrote: > From: strub...@apache.org > Subject: svn commit: r1025914 - /openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml > To: comm...@openwebbeans.apache.org > Date: Thursday, October 21, 2010, 9:48 AM > Author: struberg > Date: Thu Oct 21 09:48:24 2010 > New Revision: 1025914 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1025914&view=rev > Log: > OWB-478 upgrade checkstyle plugin to 2.6 + use new > checkstyle configuration > > Modified: > openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml > > Modified: openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1025914&r1=1025913&r2=1025914&view=diff > == > --- openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml (original) > +++ openwebbeans/trunk/pom.xml Thu Oct 21 09:48:24 2010 > @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ > > > > org.apache.maven.plugins > > maven-checkstyle-plugin > - > 2.3 > + > 2.6 > > > > > > verify-style > @@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ > > > > > org.apache.openwebbeans.build-tools > > > checkstyle-rules > - > > 1.0.0 > + > > 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT > > > > > > > > >
[jira] Created: (OWB-478) make OWB build maven-3 aware
make OWB build maven-3 aware Key: OWB-478 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-478 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Improvement Affects Versions: 1.0.0 Reporter: Mark Struberg Assignee: Mark Struberg Fix For: 1.1.0, 1.0.1 There are a few tasks needed to be able to build OpenWebBeans with maven-3. One I identified so far is that we need to upgrade the maven-checkstyle-plugin to 2.6. Since this uses checkstyle-5.2 we also need to upgrade our checkstyle configuration XML, otherwise we get the famous error "Embedded error: cannot initialize module TreeWalker - TreeWalker is not allowed as a parent of FileLength" and other similar problems. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
