[jira] [Commented] (DELTASPIKE-1070) Refactor RepositoryComponent/s

[ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16036121#comment-16036121
 ] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on DELTASPIKE-1070:
-

Commit 46a3b6759fabb55fd2b913b9f7b4635687d0c5d7 in deltaspike's branch 
refs/heads/master from [~tandraschko]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=deltaspike.git;h=46a3b67 ]

DELTASPIKE-1070 Refactor RepositoryComponent/s

> Refactor RepositoryComponent/s
> --
>
> Key: DELTASPIKE-1070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1070
> Project: DeltaSpike
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: Data-Module
>Reporter: Thomas Andraschko
>Assignee: Thomas Andraschko
> Fix For: 1.8.1
>
>
> Currently a RepositoryComponent is initialized during PAT. Therefore 
> RepositoryComponent requires a lazyInit.
> If we move the actual creation of the RepositoryComponent's to 
> AfterBeanDiscovery, we don't need such lazy init "hacks".
> IMO we should also split the RepositoryComponent into a data object and a 
> initializer as it currently feels very unstructured.
> Same applies for the RepositoryMethod and RepositoryEntity.
> We could also allign the naming a little bit:
> RepositoryComponents -> something MetadataStore or MetadataManager
> RepositoryComponent -> RepositoryMetadata
> RepositoryMethod -> RepositoryMethodMetadata
> RepositoryEntity -> EntityMetadata



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

[jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-1264) Remove portions of BeanProvider/BeanManagerProvider

[John D. Ament (JIRA)]

John D. Ament created DELTASPIKE-1264:
-

 Summary: Remove portions of BeanProvider/BeanManagerProvider
 Key: DELTASPIKE-1264
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1264
 Project: DeltaSpike
  Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: John D. Ament
 Fix For: 2.0


These internal utilities may not be needed based on CDI.current() from CDI 1.1.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

[jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-1263) Remove BeanBuilder

[John D. Ament (JIRA)]

John D. Ament created DELTASPIKE-1263:
-

 Summary: Remove BeanBuilder
 Key: DELTASPIKE-1263
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1263
 Project: DeltaSpike
  Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: John D. Ament
 Fix For: 2.0


CDI 2.0 introduces bean configurators, which handle the use cases of 
BeanBuilder.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

[jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-1260) Remove Servlet Module

[John D. Ament (JIRA)]

John D. Ament created DELTASPIKE-1260:
-

 Summary: Remove Servlet Module
 Key: DELTASPIKE-1260
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1260
 Project: DeltaSpike
  Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: John D. Ament
 Fix For: 2.0


The Servlet module is fully supported by features of Java EE 7+, and is no 
longer useful.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

[jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-1261) Remove BeanVal Module

[John D. Ament (JIRA)]

John D. Ament created DELTASPIKE-1261:
-

 Summary: Remove BeanVal Module
 Key: DELTASPIKE-1261
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1261
 Project: DeltaSpike
  Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: John D. Ament
 Fix For: 2.0


The Bean Validation module is fully supposed by Java EE 7+ and can be removed.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Re: Creating a branch for DeltaSpike 2.0? Or 1.x maintenance?

[John D. Ament]

I agree with Thomas.  While always minimal, if we can trim our internal
libraries and make them a bit more user friendly, it will simplify how
users leverage our modules (e.g. maybe we don't have a core module
anymore).  This means better module isolation.  If Mark brings config to
Geronimo via MP then we could even provide the legacy DeltaSpike Config as
a compatibility layer for those using it.

I'm also confused about the comment around "micro-profile" as well as "cdi2
as a new baseline once its really useful"

John

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 2:58 PM Thomas Andraschko <
andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:

> IMO we should try to do a cut in 2.0 and do a big cleanup (1.x should be in
> maintenance to support < JavaEE8):
> - Drop bval module and the servlet module. AFAIR the injection support is
> already in JavaEE 8.
> - We can also try to remove some core APIs (BeanManagerProvider)
> - Cleanup the JSF Module (injection support is also available in JavaEE8)
> - Cleanup Java8 hacks
>
> What parts to you mean which are required for a microprofile?
>
>
>
> 2017-06-03 17:42 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :
>
> > imo there's not a lot we should drop, because users might need those
> parts
> > e.g. for applications based on the micro-profile.
> > maybe it's just a matter of documenting an useful combination of ee8 + ds
> > and/or to highlight which parts of ds are covered by ee8.
> >
> > @ds2:
> > maybe we should mainly take the chance to improve the consistency (= few
> > but breaking api-changes).
> > (+ only use cdi2,... as a new baseline once it's really useful.)
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-06-03 16:35 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > basically +1
> > > we can do some cleanup (like removing features + modules which are
> > > available in JavaEE8)
> > > BUT - many user won't use JavaEE8 until next year as the AS' are not
> > ready.
> > > So IMO it's not necessary now.
> > >
> > > I will currently start to do some internal cleanup on the Data Module
> > e.g.
> > >
> > > 2017-06-03 16:21 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :
> > >
> > > > @romain: +1
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > > gerhard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2017-06-03 16:19 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > Any strong feature from cdi 2 we need? If so +1 otherwise -1
> > > > >
> > > > > Le 3 juin 2017 16:07, "John D. Ament"  a
> > écrit
> > > :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hey guys
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not sure there's much more for us to do in 1.x as far as
> > feature
> > > > > goes,
> > > > > > but I could be wrong.  I do think we should start to ramp up work
> > > > > > DeltaSpike 2.0:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Baseline on CDI 2.0, Java EE 8, Java 8
> > > > > > - Remove older components that are not needed any more
> > > > > > - See if there's new features we can add
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?  I'm thinking this could either be a 2.x branch, or we
> > move
> > > > > > master to a 1.x maintenance branch while we work on 2.0 in
> master.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Creating a branch for DeltaSpike 2.0? Or 1.x maintenance?

[Thomas Andraschko]

IMO we should try to do a cut in 2.0 and do a big cleanup (1.x should be in
maintenance to support < JavaEE8):
- Drop bval module and the servlet module. AFAIR the injection support is
already in JavaEE 8.
- We can also try to remove some core APIs (BeanManagerProvider)
- Cleanup the JSF Module (injection support is also available in JavaEE8)
- Cleanup Java8 hacks

What parts to you mean which are required for a microprofile?



2017-06-03 17:42 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :

> imo there's not a lot we should drop, because users might need those parts
> e.g. for applications based on the micro-profile.
> maybe it's just a matter of documenting an useful combination of ee8 + ds
> and/or to highlight which parts of ds are covered by ee8.
>
> @ds2:
> maybe we should mainly take the chance to improve the consistency (= few
> but breaking api-changes).
> (+ only use cdi2,... as a new baseline once it's really useful.)
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2017-06-03 16:35 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko  >:
>
> > basically +1
> > we can do some cleanup (like removing features + modules which are
> > available in JavaEE8)
> > BUT - many user won't use JavaEE8 until next year as the AS' are not
> ready.
> > So IMO it's not necessary now.
> >
> > I will currently start to do some internal cleanup on the Data Module
> e.g.
> >
> > 2017-06-03 16:21 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :
> >
> > > @romain: +1
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > gerhard
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2017-06-03 16:19 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> > >
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Any strong feature from cdi 2 we need? If so +1 otherwise -1
> > > >
> > > > Le 3 juin 2017 16:07, "John D. Ament"  a
> écrit
> > :
> > > >
> > > > > Hey guys
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure there's much more for us to do in 1.x as far as
> feature
> > > > goes,
> > > > > but I could be wrong.  I do think we should start to ramp up work
> > > > > DeltaSpike 2.0:
> > > > >
> > > > > - Baseline on CDI 2.0, Java EE 8, Java 8
> > > > > - Remove older components that are not needed any more
> > > > > - See if there's new features we can add
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?  I'm thinking this could either be a 2.x branch, or we
> move
> > > > > master to a 1.x maintenance branch while we work on 2.0 in master.
> > > > >
> > > > > John
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[jira] [Commented] (DELTASPIKE-1252) data-documentation missing Optional return value

[JIRA]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1252?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16036004#comment-16036004
 ] 

Jan Matèrne commented on DELTASPIKE-1252:
-

Thumbs up. You could close the issue. ;)

> data-documentation missing Optional return value
> 
>
> Key: DELTASPIKE-1252
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1252
> Project: DeltaSpike
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: Data-Module, Documentation
>Affects Versions: 1.7.2
>Reporter: Jan Matèrne
>Assignee: John D. Ament
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8.1
>
>
> http://deltaspike.apache.org/documentation/data.html lists the format for 
> methods:
> (Entity|List) (prefix)(Property[Comparator]){Operator Property 
> [Comparator]}
> Here java.util.Optional is missing:
> "(Entity|Optional|List) 
> (prefix)(Property[Comparator]){Operator Property [Comparator]}
>  
> Or in more concrete words:
> • The query method must either return an entity or an java.util.Optional 
> or a list of entities.
> • It must start with the findBy prefix ..."



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Re: Creating a branch for DeltaSpike 2.0? Or 1.x maintenance?

[Gerhard Petracek]

imo there's not a lot we should drop, because users might need those parts
e.g. for applications based on the micro-profile.
maybe it's just a matter of documenting an useful combination of ee8 + ds
and/or to highlight which parts of ds are covered by ee8.

@ds2:
maybe we should mainly take the chance to improve the consistency (= few
but breaking api-changes).
(+ only use cdi2,... as a new baseline once it's really useful.)

regards,
gerhard



2017-06-03 16:35 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko :

> basically +1
> we can do some cleanup (like removing features + modules which are
> available in JavaEE8)
> BUT - many user won't use JavaEE8 until next year as the AS' are not ready.
> So IMO it's not necessary now.
>
> I will currently start to do some internal cleanup on the Data Module e.g.
>
> 2017-06-03 16:21 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :
>
> > @romain: +1
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-06-03 16:19 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Any strong feature from cdi 2 we need? If so +1 otherwise -1
> > >
> > > Le 3 juin 2017 16:07, "John D. Ament"  a écrit
> :
> > >
> > > > Hey guys
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure there's much more for us to do in 1.x as far as feature
> > > goes,
> > > > but I could be wrong.  I do think we should start to ramp up work
> > > > DeltaSpike 2.0:
> > > >
> > > > - Baseline on CDI 2.0, Java EE 8, Java 8
> > > > - Remove older components that are not needed any more
> > > > - See if there's new features we can add
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?  I'm thinking this could either be a 2.x branch, or we move
> > > > master to a 1.x maintenance branch while we work on 2.0 in master.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Creating a branch for DeltaSpike 2.0? Or 1.x maintenance?

[Thomas Andraschko]

basically +1
we can do some cleanup (like removing features + modules which are
available in JavaEE8)
BUT - many user won't use JavaEE8 until next year as the AS' are not ready.
So IMO it's not necessary now.

I will currently start to do some internal cleanup on the Data Module e.g.

2017-06-03 16:21 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :

> @romain: +1
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2017-06-03 16:19 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Any strong feature from cdi 2 we need? If so +1 otherwise -1
> >
> > Le 3 juin 2017 16:07, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :
> >
> > > Hey guys
> > >
> > > I'm not sure there's much more for us to do in 1.x as far as feature
> > goes,
> > > but I could be wrong.  I do think we should start to ramp up work
> > > DeltaSpike 2.0:
> > >
> > > - Baseline on CDI 2.0, Java EE 8, Java 8
> > > - Remove older components that are not needed any more
> > > - See if there's new features we can add
> > >
> > > Thoughts?  I'm thinking this could either be a 2.x branch, or we move
> > > master to a 1.x maintenance branch while we work on 2.0 in master.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> >
>

Re: Creating a branch for DeltaSpike 2.0? Or 1.x maintenance?

[Gerhard Petracek]

@romain: +1

regards,
gerhard



2017-06-03 16:19 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :

> Hi
>
> Any strong feature from cdi 2 we need? If so +1 otherwise -1
>
> Le 3 juin 2017 16:07, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :
>
> > Hey guys
> >
> > I'm not sure there's much more for us to do in 1.x as far as feature
> goes,
> > but I could be wrong.  I do think we should start to ramp up work
> > DeltaSpike 2.0:
> >
> > - Baseline on CDI 2.0, Java EE 8, Java 8
> > - Remove older components that are not needed any more
> > - See if there's new features we can add
> >
> > Thoughts?  I'm thinking this could either be a 2.x branch, or we move
> > master to a 1.x maintenance branch while we work on 2.0 in master.
> >
> > John
> >
>

[jira] [Updated] (DELTASPIKE-1070) Refactor RepositoryComponent/s

[Thomas Andraschko (JIRA)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Thomas Andraschko updated DELTASPIKE-1070:
--
Fix Version/s: 1.8.1

> Refactor RepositoryComponent/s
> --
>
> Key: DELTASPIKE-1070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1070
> Project: DeltaSpike
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: Data-Module
>Reporter: Thomas Andraschko
>Assignee: Thomas Andraschko
> Fix For: 1.8.1
>
>
> Currently a RepositoryComponent is initialized during PAT. Therefore 
> RepositoryComponent requires a lazyInit.
> If we move the actual creation of the RepositoryComponent's to 
> AfterBeanDiscovery, we don't need such lazy init "hacks".
> IMO we should also split the RepositoryComponent into a data object and a 
> initializer as it currently feels very unstructured.
> Same applies for the RepositoryMethod and RepositoryEntity.
> We could also allign the naming a little bit:
> RepositoryComponents -> something MetadataStore or MetadataManager
> RepositoryComponent -> RepositoryMetadata
> RepositoryMethod -> RepositoryMethodMetadata
> RepositoryEntity -> EntityMetadata



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Re: Creating a branch for DeltaSpike 2.0? Or 1.x maintenance?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi

Any strong feature from cdi 2 we need? If so +1 otherwise -1

Le 3 juin 2017 16:07, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :

> Hey guys
>
> I'm not sure there's much more for us to do in 1.x as far as feature goes,
> but I could be wrong.  I do think we should start to ramp up work
> DeltaSpike 2.0:
>
> - Baseline on CDI 2.0, Java EE 8, Java 8
> - Remove older components that are not needed any more
> - See if there's new features we can add
>
> Thoughts?  I'm thinking this could either be a 2.x branch, or we move
> master to a 1.x maintenance branch while we work on 2.0 in master.
>
> John
>

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache DeltaSpike-1.8.0

[John D. Ament]

I've updated the website (not published) as well, but need to add to news.
Javadocs are there now as well.

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 7:33 AM Gerhard Petracek 
wrote:

> short addition:
>
> it looks like all release steps after the (git) push are missing (see [1]).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] http://deltaspike.apache.org/staging/steps_for_a_release.html
>
>
>
> 2017-06-03 13:24 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek :
>
> > hi thomas,
> >
> > thx for the heads-up!
> > we discussed it in the irc-channel already...
> > i've pushed the fix, but we also have to upload the files for the
> > download-page,...
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-06-03 12:57 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>
> > :
> >
> >> Hi Mark,
> >>
> >> is everything ok with the current builds?
> >> I did a fresh checkout today i cant build anymore:
> >>
> >> The build could not read 1 project -> [Help 1]
> >>
> >>   The project
> >> org.apache.deltaspike.modules:deltaspike-data-module-test-ja
> >> va8:1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> >> (/home/tandraschko/NetBeansProjects/deltaspike/deltaspike/mo
> >> dules/data/test-java8/pom.xml)
> >> has 1 error
> >> Non-resolvable parent POM: Could not find artifact
> >> org.apache.deltaspike.modules:data-module-project:pom:1.8.0-SNAPSHOT and
> >> 'parent.relativePath' points at wrong local POM @ line 22, column 13 ->
> >> [Help 2]
> >>
> >>
> >> It seems that deltaspike-data-module-test-java8 still points to
> >> 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Thomas
> >>
> >> 2017-05-28 10:16 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg :
> >>
> >> > Hi John!
> >> >
> >> > > I'd recommend just running a mvn deploy -Pdistribution from the
> 1.8.0
> >> > tag,
> >> > > that should resolve this.
> >> >
> >> > Sadly not. Since the dist modules only get added conditionally they
> >> didn't
> >> > even have been included in the version bump.
> >> > So they are still on the 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT.
> >> >
> >> > I gonna clean up all our build and reroll the release.
> >> >
> >> > LieGrue,
> >> > strub
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Am 27.05.2017 um 22:33 schrieb John D. Ament  >:
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 12:41 PM Mark Struberg
> >>  >> > >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Found them locally. Seems they are not treated as attached
> artifacts?
> >> > Why
> >> > >> so?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I'm not able to replicate the issue when I follow the release
> >> > > instructions, I just staged a release and got all of the artifacts.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'd recommend just running a mvn deploy -Pdistribution from the
> 1.8.0
> >> > tag,
> >> > > that should resolve this.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >> I can put them to dist/dev.
> >> > >> Which of the artifacts do you need?
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > > bom, full distribution.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >>
> >> > >> LieGrue,
> >> > >> strub
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> Am 27.05.2017 um 17:15 schrieb John D. Ament <
> johndam...@apache.org
> >> >:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> BTW while the release only matters about source, we know users
> care
> >> > about
> >> > >>> binaries [1] [2]
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1194
> >> > >>> [2]:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/72191470ff23a7b11a16b3b8e9d16e
> >> > ba48a755e552b58b9c88b426c2@%3Cusers.deltaspike.apache.org%3E
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:10 AM John D. Ament <
> >> john.d.am...@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > >>> wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> >  Did you run with -Pdistribution -DreleaseProfiles=distribution as
> >> >  mentioned on [1]?
> >> > 
> >> >  [1]: http://deltaspike.apache.org/steps_for_a_release.html
> >> > 
> >> >  On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:06 AM Mark Struberg
> >> > >> 
> >> >  wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > > Nothing has been changed in the build afaik.
> >> > > So if the bom was not produced via the maven build then it is
> not
> >> > here
> >> > >> -
> >> > > and most probably never has been.
> >> > >
> >> > > Note that an ASF release is ONLY about the sources and not about
> >> any
> >> > > binary.
> >> > > Binaries are just served for convenience.
> >> > >
> >> > > LieGrue,
> >> > > strub
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >> Am 27.05.2017 um 15:37 schrieb John D. Ament <
> >> johndam...@apache.org
> >> > >:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Hi Mark,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I don't see the actual binary distribution/distribution bom in
> >> the
> >> > > release
> >> > >> repo.  Are they missing?  If they are I'm -1, I use the bom in
> my
> >> > > project
> >> > >> today.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> John
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:48 AM Mark Struberg
> >> > > 
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> Hi folks!
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> I'd 

buildbot success in on deltaspike-site-staging

[buildbot]

The Buildbot has detected a restored build on builder deltaspike-site-staging 
while building . Full details are available at:
https://ci.apache.org/builders/deltaspike-site-staging/builds/167

Buildbot URL: https://ci.apache.org/

Buildslave for this Build: bb-cms-slave

Build Reason: The AnyBranchScheduler scheduler named 
'on-deltaspike-site-commit' triggered this build
Build Source Stamp: [branch deltaspike/site] 1797503
Blamelist: johndament

Build succeeded!

Sincerely,
 -The Buildbot

[jira] [Commented] (DELTASPIKE-1252) data-documentation missing Optional return value

[ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1252?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16035971#comment-16035971
 ] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on DELTASPIKE-1252:
-

Commit fbf62e3bbc17310ff2c8eccd096f19764e02d4c1 in deltaspike's branch 
refs/heads/master from [~johndament]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=deltaspike.git;h=fbf62e3 ]

DELTASPIKE-1252 - Clarifying text for what can be returned.


> data-documentation missing Optional return value
> 
>
> Key: DELTASPIKE-1252
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1252
> Project: DeltaSpike
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: Data-Module, Documentation
>Affects Versions: 1.7.2
>Reporter: Jan Matèrne
>Assignee: John D. Ament
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8.1
>
>
> http://deltaspike.apache.org/documentation/data.html lists the format for 
> methods:
> (Entity|List) (prefix)(Property[Comparator]){Operator Property 
> [Comparator]}
> Here java.util.Optional is missing:
> "(Entity|Optional|List) 
> (prefix)(Property[Comparator]){Operator Property [Comparator]}
>  
> Or in more concrete words:
> • The query method must either return an entity or an java.util.Optional 
> or a list of entities.
> • It must start with the findBy prefix ..."



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

[jira] [Resolved] (DELTASPIKE-1259) upgraded version numbers

[Gerhard Petracek (JIRA)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Gerhard Petracek resolved DELTASPIKE-1259.
--
Resolution: Fixed

> upgraded version numbers
> 
>
> Key: DELTASPIKE-1259
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1259
> Project: DeltaSpike
>  Issue Type: Task
>  Components: Build
>Affects Versions: 1.8.0
>Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
> Fix For: 1.8.1
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache DeltaSpike-1.8.0

[Gerhard Petracek]

hi thomas,

thx for the heads-up!
we discussed it in the irc-channel already...
i've pushed the fix, but we also have to upload the files for the
download-page,...

regards,
gerhard



2017-06-03 12:57 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko :

> Hi Mark,
>
> is everything ok with the current builds?
> I did a fresh checkout today i cant build anymore:
>
> The build could not read 1 project -> [Help 1]
>
>   The project
> org.apache.deltaspike.modules:deltaspike-data-module-test-ja
> va8:1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> (/home/tandraschko/NetBeansProjects/deltaspike/deltaspike/
> modules/data/test-java8/pom.xml)
> has 1 error
> Non-resolvable parent POM: Could not find artifact
> org.apache.deltaspike.modules:data-module-project:pom:1.8.0-SNAPSHOT and
> 'parent.relativePath' points at wrong local POM @ line 22, column 13 ->
> [Help 2]
>
>
> It seems that deltaspike-data-module-test-java8 still points to
> 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
> 2017-05-28 10:16 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg :
>
> > Hi John!
> >
> > > I'd recommend just running a mvn deploy -Pdistribution from the 1.8.0
> > tag,
> > > that should resolve this.
> >
> > Sadly not. Since the dist modules only get added conditionally they
> didn't
> > even have been included in the version bump.
> > So they are still on the 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT.
> >
> > I gonna clean up all our build and reroll the release.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> > > Am 27.05.2017 um 22:33 schrieb John D. Ament :
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 12:41 PM Mark Struberg
>  > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Found them locally. Seems they are not treated as attached artifacts?
> > Why
> > >> so?
> > >>
> > >> I'm not able to replicate the issue when I follow the release
> > > instructions, I just staged a release and got all of the artifacts.
> > >
> > > I'd recommend just running a mvn deploy -Pdistribution from the 1.8.0
> > tag,
> > > that should resolve this.
> > >
> > >
> > >> I can put them to dist/dev.
> > >> Which of the artifacts do you need?
> > >>
> > >
> > > bom, full distribution.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> LieGrue,
> > >> strub
> > >>
> > >>> Am 27.05.2017 um 17:15 schrieb John D. Ament  >:
> > >>>
> > >>> BTW while the release only matters about source, we know users care
> > about
> > >>> binaries [1] [2]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1194
> > >>> [2]:
> > >>>
> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/72191470ff23a7b11a16b3b8e9d16e
> > ba48a755e552b58b9c88b426c2@%3Cusers.deltaspike.apache.org%3E
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:10 AM John D. Ament <
> john.d.am...@gmail.com
> > >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  Did you run with -Pdistribution -DreleaseProfiles=distribution as
> >  mentioned on [1]?
> > 
> >  [1]: http://deltaspike.apache.org/steps_for_a_release.html
> > 
> >  On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:06 AM Mark Struberg
> > >> 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > Nothing has been changed in the build afaik.
> > > So if the bom was not produced via the maven build then it is not
> > here
> > >> -
> > > and most probably never has been.
> > >
> > > Note that an ASF release is ONLY about the sources and not about
> any
> > > binary.
> > > Binaries are just served for convenience.
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >> Am 27.05.2017 um 15:37 schrieb John D. Ament <
> johndam...@apache.org
> > >:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Mark,
> > >>
> > >> I don't see the actual binary distribution/distribution bom in the
> > > release
> > >> repo.  Are they missing?  If they are I'm -1, I use the bom in my
> > > project
> > >> today.
> > >>
> > >> John
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:48 AM Mark Struberg
> > > 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi folks!
> > >>>
> > >>> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache DeltaSpike-1.8.0
> > >>>
> > >>> There have been lots of improvements and bug fixes:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12312820=12338003
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> The staging repository is
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> > orgapachedeltaspike-1043/
> > >>>
> > >>> I've pushed the build branch to my github repo.
> > >>> https://github.com/struberg/deltaspike/tree/release_
> > deltaspike_1.8.0
> > >>> the tag is
> > > https://github.com/struberg/deltaspike/tree/deltaspike-1.8.0
> > >>>
> > >>> This will get merge and pushed to ASF master once the VOTE
> > succeeds.
> > >>>
> > >>> The source release is here
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> > 

[jira] [Commented] (DELTASPIKE-1259) upgraded version numbers

[ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16035947#comment-16035947
 ] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on DELTASPIKE-1259:
-

Commit b1276fcd3c5ff296674b8dd5f5432c549c996d04 in deltaspike's branch 
refs/heads/master from [~gpetracek]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=deltaspike.git;h=b1276fc ]

DELTASPIKE-1259 upgraded version numbers


> upgraded version numbers
> 
>
> Key: DELTASPIKE-1259
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1259
> Project: DeltaSpike
>  Issue Type: Task
>  Components: Build
>Affects Versions: 1.8.0
>Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
> Fix For: 1.8.1
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

[jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-1259) upgraded version numbers

[Gerhard Petracek (JIRA)]

Gerhard Petracek created DELTASPIKE-1259:


 Summary: upgraded version numbers
 Key: DELTASPIKE-1259
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1259
 Project: DeltaSpike
  Issue Type: Task
  Components: Build
Affects Versions: 1.8.0
Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
 Fix For: 1.8.1






--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache DeltaSpike-1.8.0

[Thomas Andraschko]

Hi Mark,

is everything ok with the current builds?
I did a fresh checkout today i cant build anymore:

The build could not read 1 project -> [Help 1]

  The project
org.apache.deltaspike.modules:deltaspike-data-module-test-java8:1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
(/home/tandraschko/NetBeansProjects/deltaspike/deltaspike/modules/data/test-java8/pom.xml)
has 1 error
Non-resolvable parent POM: Could not find artifact
org.apache.deltaspike.modules:data-module-project:pom:1.8.0-SNAPSHOT and
'parent.relativePath' points at wrong local POM @ line 22, column 13 ->
[Help 2]


It seems that deltaspike-data-module-test-java8 still points to
1.8.0-SNAPSHOT

Regards,
Thomas

2017-05-28 10:16 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg :

> Hi John!
>
> > I'd recommend just running a mvn deploy -Pdistribution from the 1.8.0
> tag,
> > that should resolve this.
>
> Sadly not. Since the dist modules only get added conditionally they didn't
> even have been included in the version bump.
> So they are still on the 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT.
>
> I gonna clean up all our build and reroll the release.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 27.05.2017 um 22:33 schrieb John D. Ament :
> >
> > On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 12:41 PM Mark Struberg  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Found them locally. Seems they are not treated as attached artifacts?
> Why
> >> so?
> >>
> >> I'm not able to replicate the issue when I follow the release
> > instructions, I just staged a release and got all of the artifacts.
> >
> > I'd recommend just running a mvn deploy -Pdistribution from the 1.8.0
> tag,
> > that should resolve this.
> >
> >
> >> I can put them to dist/dev.
> >> Which of the artifacts do you need?
> >>
> >
> > bom, full distribution.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>> Am 27.05.2017 um 17:15 schrieb John D. Ament :
> >>>
> >>> BTW while the release only matters about source, we know users care
> about
> >>> binaries [1] [2]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-1194
> >>> [2]:
> >>>
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/72191470ff23a7b11a16b3b8e9d16e
> ba48a755e552b58b9c88b426c2@%3Cusers.deltaspike.apache.org%3E
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:10 AM John D. Ament  >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Did you run with -Pdistribution -DreleaseProfiles=distribution as
>  mentioned on [1]?
> 
>  [1]: http://deltaspike.apache.org/steps_for_a_release.html
> 
>  On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:06 AM Mark Struberg
> >> 
>  wrote:
> 
> > Nothing has been changed in the build afaik.
> > So if the bom was not produced via the maven build then it is not
> here
> >> -
> > and most probably never has been.
> >
> > Note that an ASF release is ONLY about the sources and not about any
> > binary.
> > Binaries are just served for convenience.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >> Am 27.05.2017 um 15:37 schrieb John D. Ament  >:
> >>
> >> Hi Mark,
> >>
> >> I don't see the actual binary distribution/distribution bom in the
> > release
> >> repo.  Are they missing?  If they are I'm -1, I use the bom in my
> > project
> >> today.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:48 AM Mark Struberg
> > 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi folks!
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache DeltaSpike-1.8.0
> >>>
> >>> There have been lots of improvements and bug fixes:
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12312820=12338003
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The staging repository is
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachedeltaspike-1043/
> >>>
> >>> I've pushed the build branch to my github repo.
> >>> https://github.com/struberg/deltaspike/tree/release_
> deltaspike_1.8.0
> >>> the tag is
> > https://github.com/struberg/deltaspike/tree/deltaspike-1.8.0
> >>>
> >>> This will get merge and pushed to ASF master once the VOTE
> succeeds.
> >>>
> >>> The source release is here
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachedeltaspike-1043/org/apache/deltaspike/deltaspike/1.8.0/
> >>>
> >>> Please VOTE:
> >>>
> >>> [+1] yeah dude, let's ship it!
> >>> [+0] meh, don't care
> >>> [-1] woah, stop there is a ${showstopper}
> >>>
> >>> The VOTE is open for 72h.
> >>>
> >>> txs and LieGrue,
> >>> strub
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
>
>