Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Arthur 1.0.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 10:49 AM Francois Papon 
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> regards,
>
> Françoisfpa...@apache.org
>
> Le 08/01/2021 à 12:40, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to release Arthur 1.0.1.
>
> Here is the changelog:
>
> T Patch Info Key  Summary Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution Created
> Updated Due Development
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6799 
>
> Enable to use ldd to detect libs to package in docker images
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 05/Jan/21 05/Jan/21
> Actions
> 
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6798 
>
> Enable to use a custom annotation marker instead of @RegisterClass
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 30/Dec/20 30/Dec/20
> Actions
> 
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6797 
>
> Enable winegrower knight/extension
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 30/Dec/20 30/Dec/20
> Actions
> 
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6796 
>
> Provide an OpenWebBeans integration
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 30/Dec/20 30/Dec/20
> Actions
> 
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6795 
>
> Upgrade to graalvm 20.3.0
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 30/Dec/20 30/Dec/20
> Actions
> 
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6778 
>
> Enable to download graal on github
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 17/Jul/20 17/Jul/20
> Actions
> 
> [image: Task] 
> GERONIMO-6777 
>
> Upgrade default graal version to 20.1.0.r8
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
>  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
>  [image:
> Major] RESOLVED Fixed 17/Jul/20 17/Jul/20
> Actions
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo BatchEE 0.6

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 7:47 AM Francois Papon 
wrote:

> Nice!
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks Romain!
>
> regards,
>
> Françoisfpa...@apache.org
>
> Le 12/11/2020 à 12:39, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here is the vote for batchee 0.6.
> Here is the changelog:
>
> 1–14 of 14View in Issue Navigator
> 
> P T Key Summary Assignee Status
> [image: Critical] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-135
>  Command "Names" not
> working  Reinhard
> Sandtner
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-108
>  Job entities don't
> support optimistic locking
>  Unassigned OPEN
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-126
>  upgrade to tomee-7.0.4
>  Mark Struberg
> 
> OPEN
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-131
>  JBatchController
> Service does not stop JBatch on shutdown
>  Mark Struberg
> 
> OPEN
> [image: Major] [image: New Feature] BATCHEE-132
>  Ensure
> ServicesManager has a lifecycle (= adds close())
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-133
>  remote stop dosen't
> work with BatchEE-CLI  Mark
> Struberg
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-134
>  EJB Timer not working
> in CLI Runner 
> Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-136
>  Errors thrown in
> JobListeners aren't printed at all
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-141
>  Upgrade TomEE
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-142
>  Add CDI SE lifecycle
> (cli)  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-143
>  Add jakarta module
> for jbatch impl  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Minor] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-138
>  Failure in
> Read-Process-Write Loop: Somehow one of the metrics was zero
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Minor] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-139
>  
> JPAPersistenceManagerService
> throws a Nullpointer in case an invalid execution id is passed to
> getJobExecution 
> Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Minor] [image: Bug] BATCHEE-140
>  Propagate
> JobOperatorImpl instance to SimpleJobExecutionCallbackService properly
>  Unassigned RESOLVED
> 1–14 of 14
>
> Tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-batchee.git;a=tag;h=b8f6a9427014a2c512de84c0cf074e143ddf82e8
> Dist: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/batchee/
> Staging:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebatchee-1006/
> My key is still the same.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 release
> [ ] -1 dont ${cause}
>
> vote will be open for 3 days or until we get enough bindings.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo JWT Auth 1.0.4

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:53 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Here is the vote for our JWT Auth implementation v 1.0.4.
>
> The issues are:
>
> [image: Major][image: Bug]GERONIMO-6757
> Changes to make
> geronimo-jwt-auth work with Aries CDI
> UnassignedOPEN[image:
> Major][image: Improvement]GERONIMO-6765
> Add basic OSGi
> support to germino-jwt-auth
> Raymond Augé
> 
> OPEN
>
> Tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jwt-auth.git;a=tag;h=6e10f2d71f9786e77b46466e99cbe3f7db18e12d
> Dist area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/jwt-auth/
> Staging:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1134/
> My key is the same than for last votes.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 release
> [ ] -1 don't release ${cause}
>
> Vote will be open as usual for 3 full days or until we get enough binding
> votes.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4

[Raymond Auge]

I'm pretty sure everything was rolled back in preparation for the
subsequent attempt.

- Ray

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:07 PM Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> I've abandoned it.
>
> Feel free to take it up again whenever you want.
>
> - Ray
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:01 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> Up, is this vote (1.0.4) completely abandoned?
>> I'd like master to be released but not sure where we are
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>
>>
>> Le mar. 17 déc. 2019 à 09:31, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>>
>>> Don't worry, I'll keep an eye on it.
>>> And thanks for getting it rolling!
>>>
>>> txs and LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> > Am 11.12.2019 um 20:30 schrieb Raymond Auge >> >:
>>> >
>>> > Hey all, So I will cancel this vote and start a new one since I messed
>>> up the email.
>>> >
>>> > Also, this should act like a heads up that I want to do a release.
>>> >
>>> > I can give it a couple of days.
>>> >
>>> > - Ray
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:22 PM Raymond Auge 
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hello All,
>>> >
>>> > I'd like to call a vote for release of geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4
>>> >
>>> > The staging repo can be found here
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116
>>> >
>>> > The sources are here:
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip.sha1
>>> >
>>> > Please VOTE
>>> >
>>> > [+1] go ship it
>>> > [+0] meh, don't care
>>> > [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>>> >
>>> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
>>> > release
>>> >
>>> > The staging repo can be found here
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115
>>> >
>>> > The sources are here:
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.12/
>>> > sha1 90b2cfb57b9de11a9fba9af84dcdfb70eb295af0
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Please VOTE
>>> >
>>> > [+1] go ship it
>>> > [+0] meh, don't care
>>> > [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>>> >
>>> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
> OSGi Fellow
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4

[Raymond Auge]

I've abandoned it.

Feel free to take it up again whenever you want.

- Ray

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:01 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Up, is this vote (1.0.4) completely abandoned?
> I'd like master to be released but not sure where we are
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le mar. 17 déc. 2019 à 09:31, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>
>> Don't worry, I'll keep an eye on it.
>> And thanks for getting it rolling!
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 11.12.2019 um 20:30 schrieb Raymond Auge :
>> >
>> > Hey all, So I will cancel this vote and start a new one since I messed
>> up the email.
>> >
>> > Also, this should act like a heads up that I want to do a release.
>> >
>> > I can give it a couple of days.
>> >
>> > - Ray
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:22 PM Raymond Auge 
>> wrote:
>> > Hello All,
>> >
>> > I'd like to call a vote for release of geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4
>> >
>> > The staging repo can be found here
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116
>> >
>> > The sources are here:
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip.sha1
>> >
>> > Please VOTE
>> >
>> > [+1] go ship it
>> > [+0] meh, don't care
>> > [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>> >
>> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
>> > release
>> >
>> > The staging repo can be found here
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115
>> >
>> > The sources are here:
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.12/
>> > sha1 90b2cfb57b9de11a9fba9af84dcdfb70eb295af0
>> >
>> >
>> > Please VOTE
>> >
>> > [+1] go ship it
>> > [+0] meh, don't care
>> > [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>> >
>> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>>
>>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Simple JCache 1.0.5

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 9:36 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Here is the vote for our JCache implementation.
> The only issue it fixes is:
>
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6789
>  Simple JCache
> extension does not work well with cdi (cdi helper not found)
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
>
> Tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jcache-simple.git;a=commit;h=0f80de0706534d19d9bca0f4aa22b6b330996971
> Dist area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/simple-jcache/
> Staging:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1133/
> My key is the same than for last votes.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 release
> [ ] -1 don't release ${cause}
>
> Vote will be open as usual for 3 full days or until we get enough binding
> votes.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-openapi-1.0.13

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:21 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

>
>
> Hi!
>
> Here is the staging repo
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1132/
>
>
>
> source jars can be found at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1132/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.13/
> sha1 074ecb59b23e5a8550126e360dc244c75bd5dc6d
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] go ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop, there is a ${showstopper}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> Here is my own one for the start.
> +1
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] geronimo jsonp, jsonb, security, validation releases

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 4:39 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I want to call a VOTE on releasing
>
>
> geronimo-json_1.1_spec-1.5
> geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec-1.4
> geronimo-security_1.0_spec-1.1
> geronimo-validation_2.0_spec-1.1
>
> The only difference to the previous releases is the addition of jpms
> module names via manifest by updating to genesis-flava8-2.4.
> I did run the release with Java8. Have fun!
>
>
> The staging repo is:
> *https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1131/
> *
>
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] go ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop, there is a ${showstopper}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> Here is my own one for the start.
> +1
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jcdi_1.0 and 1.1 spec jars

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 1:37 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I want to call a VOTE on releasing
> geronimo-jcdi_1.0-1.1 and
> geronimo-jcdi_1.1-1.1
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1129/
>
> source jars can be found
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1129/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jcdi_1.0_spec/1.1/
> sha1 54f20c989d20cb56363c88b9884376821b6b0a4e
>
> and
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1129/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jcdi_1.1_spec/1.1/
> sha1 8ef821f792a6d1286edf719774e8ea32ded145b6
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] go ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop, there is a ${showstopper}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> Here is my own one for the start.
> +1
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jcdi_2.0 spec api version 1.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 1:40 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I want to call a VOTE on releasing
> geronimo-jcdi_2.0 1.3
>
> The staging repo is:
> *https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1130/
> *
>
> source jars can be found
> *https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1130/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec/1.3/
> *
> sha1 3b12c73bef67722578fa68874074879fd0473748
>
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] go ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop, there is a ${showstopper}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> Here is my own one for the start.
> +1
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* (@Liferay)
OSGi Fellow

Re: [DISCUSS] release a few specs

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu., Oct. 15, 2020, 8:04 a.m. Daniel Cunha, 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Em qui., 15 de out. de 2020 às 08:45, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> j...@nanthrax.net> escreveu:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> Le 15 oct. 2020 à 12:37, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>>
>> hi!
>>
>> I'd love to release a few specs today. They do not have any API changes
>> but are important nonetheless:
>>
>> The following 3 specs did get an important fix against a
>> ClassCastException
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6784
>>
>> Txs to Arne Limburg for this fix!
>>
>> This affects 3 spec artifacts:
>> *   geronimo-jcdi_1.0_spec
>> *   geronimo-jcdi_1.1_spec
>> *   geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec
>>
>>
>> The other category of specs I'd love to release fall into the Java9
>> Module updates I prepared with genesis java8-flava:
>> *   geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec
>> *   geronimo-json_1.1_spec
>> *   geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec
>> *   geronimo-security_1.0_spec
>> *   geronimo-validation_2.0_spec
>>
>> Gonna start rolling those releases soon.
>> So cry up now ;)
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Daniel "soro" Cunha
> https://twitter.com/dvlc_
>

Re: [VOTE] geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec 1.0.0

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 10:59 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I’d like to call a VOTE on the geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec 1.0.0
>
> Here is the staging repo
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1127
>
> And the source jar which is voted on
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1127/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec/1.0.0/geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec-1.0.0-source-release.zip
>
> SVN tag
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec-1.0.0/
>
> My key can be found at
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>
> please VOTE
> [+1] all fine, ship it
> [+0] don't care
> [-1] stop, because ${reason}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo JavaMail Impl and Provider 1.0.0 for javamail spec 1.6

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 11:04 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I’d like to call a VOTE on the Geronimo JavaMail Impl and Provider for
> javamail spec 1.6
>
> Here is the staging repo
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1128
>
> And the source jar which is voted on
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1128/org/apache/geronimo/javamail/geronimo-javamail_1.6/1.0.0/geronimo-javamail_1.6-1.0.0-source-release.zip
>
> SVN tag
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/javamail/tags/geronimo-javamail_1.6-1.0.0/
>
> My key can be found at
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>
> please VOTE
> [+1] all fine, ship it
> [+0] don't care
> [-1] stop, because ${reason}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Health v2.0.0 and Geronimo Metrics 1.0.5

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue., Sep. 15, 2020, 8:31 a.m. Romain Manni-Bucau, 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to release our microprofile Health implementation in v2.0.0 and
> Metrics implementation in v1.0.5.
>
> Main change is to support the new health spec (3.0.0-RC3) which drops
> @Health and new metrics spec version (3.0.0-RC2) which reworked global tag
> handling.
>
> Tags are here:
> - health:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-health.git;a=commit;h=97b8a288b17686ae5ea8ee56087b7fe026743030
> - metrics:
> Staging repos are there:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1125/
> - health:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1125/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-health-parent/2.0.0/
> - metrics:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1125/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-metrics-parent/1.0.5/
> Sources are there:
> - health: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/health/
> - metrics: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/metrics/
>
> And my key is still the same.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] - website

[Raymond Auge]

+1

Nice job!

- Ray

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:46 AM Francois Papon 
wrote:

> Thanks Romain,
>
> Let me know ;)
>
> regards,
>
> Françoisfpa...@apache.org
>
> Le 20/05/2020 à 08:43, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>
> Anyone against merging it? (will wait 2 more days then if there is no
> objection I assume everyone is ok since it makes > 10 days without any
> blocker reported)
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le dim. 10 mai 2020 à 09:20, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
>> Can anyone review it before we merge, would be great to have some other
>> pmc feedback
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le dim. 10 mai 2020 à 09:06, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Thx. I gonna take a look.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> Le sam. 9 mai 2020 ? 21:19, Francois Papon 
>>> a ?crit :
>>>
 Done:

 https://github.com/apache/geronimo-website/pull/1

 regards,

 Fran?oisfpa...@apache.org

 Le 09/05/2020 ? 15:36, Romain Manni-Bucau a ?crit :

 AFAIK we don't use that at all so feel free to create a branch dropping
 everything.

 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github
  | LinkedIn
  | Book
 


 Le sam. 9 mai 2020 ? 15:22, Francois Papon <
 francois.pa...@openobject.fr> a ?crit :

 Ah yes, got it.

 It's an online provider for my personal server so I don't have the
 right to change it but I don't think we will have the problem with the ASF
 server.

 Btw, I saw that a github repo exist for geronimo-website but I'm not
 sure the content is used:

 https://github.com/apache/geronimo-website

 May be I can push a PR on it?

 regards,

 Fran?oisfpa...@apache.org

 Le 09/05/2020 ? 15:15, Romain Manni-Bucau a ?crit :

 [image: image.png] for example.

 But long story short the page is in utf8 (and properly setup as such)
 but the server sets the charset through content-type as iso8859-1 (not sure
 we would get it @asf). text/html; charset=iso-8859-1-
 content-type:
 text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
 content-type:
 text/html; charset=iso-8859-1


 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github
  | LinkedIn
  | Book
 


 Le sam. 9 mai 2020 ? 14:31, Francois Papon <
 francois.pa...@openobject.fr> a ?crit :

 Hi Romain,

 I dropped the manifest.json.

 About the encoding issue, I can't see it, can you provide some info?

 In the html, the encoding is define to utf-8.

 regards,

 Fran?oisfpa...@apache.org

 Le 09/05/2020 ? 10:08, Romain Manni-Bucau a ?crit :

 Looks good,
 Two small details: guess the manifest.json should be filtered or
 dropped and the encoding issue is due to the server?

 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github
  | LinkedIn
  | Book
 


 Le sam. 9 mai 2020 ? 09:57, Francois Papon <
 francois.pa...@openobject.fr> a ?crit :

 Hi,

 I added a section with a disclaimer, let me know ;)

 regards,

 Fran?oisfpa...@apache.org

 Le 09/05/2020 ? 09:14, Francois Papon a ?crit :

 Hi,

 Thanks for the feedbacks!

 Agree with David's proposal, I will add a section about that.

 regards,

 Fran?oisfpa...@apache.org

 Le 09/05/2020 ? 09:00, Romain Manni-Bucau a ?crit :

 Looks awesome and is clearl

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo Specs JCDI_2.0 1.2, Annotation_1.3 1.3, AtInject_1.0 1.2, Interceptor_1.2 1.2, JSONP_1.1 1.4, JSONB_1.0 1.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 2:14 AM Francois Papon 
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> regards,
>
> Françoisfpa...@apache.org
>
> Le 28/04/2020 à 07:59, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Here is the vote for some of our spec with jakarta shades.
>
> Tags:
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jcdi_2.0_spec-1.2/
>  (rev 1877103)
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-annotation_1.3_spec-1.3/
>  (rev
> 1877106)
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-atinject_1.0_spec-1.2/
>  (rev
> 1877109)
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-interceptor_1.2_spec-1.2/
>  (rev
> 1877112)
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-json_1.1_spec-1.4/
>  (rev
> 1877115)
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec-1.3/
>  (rev
> 1877118)
> Dist area:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1124
> Staging repo: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/specs/
> My key is still the same.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 release it
> [ ] -1 dont' release it ${cause}
>
> Vote is open for 3 days or until we get enough bindings as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo XBean 4.17

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre 
wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le 27 avr. 2020 à 16:47, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Here is the vote for xbean 4.17 which provides asm8 shade.
>
> Here is the tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.17/ (rev
> 1877082)
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1123
> Here is the dist area:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/xbean/
> My Key is the same than last time.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 release it
> [ ] -1 cause ${blocker}
>
> Vote will be opened for 3 days or until we get enough bindings as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [DISCUSS] JakartaEE - continue rolling our own API jars vs use official ones?

[Raymond Auge]

As someone who has fought for better OSGi support in the MP spec APIs I can
say that this has proven difficult and largely without success.

Le sam. 25 avr. 2020 à 10:43, Mark Struberg  a écrit :

> JakartaEE moved to the Eclipse Foundation and all the APIs are now
>> available without much restrictions.
>> There are 4 potentially problematic issues with the 'official' spec APIs:
>>
>> 1.) Most of them are EPLv2 licensed. This is a catB license [1] and
>> weak-copyleft. That means we MUST add attribution and MUST provide a source
>> code download. And of course not only we need to do this, but reciprocallly
>> also all the downstream consumers and users.
>>
>
This is the weakest part of my knowledge about it, but I cannot disagree.


>
>> 2.) Our very own geronimo spec APIs used to have really great OSGi
>> integration. The official API jars not so much. Some of them have no OSGi
>> support at all. Did anyone look at the new official spec APIs? Can they be
>> used in OSGi environments? I'm  not an OSGi person myself, so I need others
>> to join into this discussion.
>>
>
I can attest that the spec jars *cannot be used together in a pure OSGi
environment without modification*! You don't have to look further than the
package imports of the specs as a whole to see that they are disjointed in
terms of the import requirements. This is only the first part of the issue.


>
>> 3.) Java8 support. Our own spec APIs mostly do not have module
>> information. I just recently added this via MANIFEST.MF. The official spec
>> API jars mostly use a module-info.class file. While this is technically
>> preferable, it often bombs up with older low level bytecode manipulation
>> libraries. The cause is that module-info.class must at least be a Java9
>> class file. So it's not really compatible with Java8. This doesn't happen
>> that often - but I saw it happening. Is this really a problem? Or should we
>> move to Java11 with JakartaEE anyway?
>>
>
With modern tooling, Geronimo can continue building on Java8 to remain
compatible, while also generating a Java9 module-info.java (even while
still using the maven-bundle-plugin) if we choose. Bnd since 4.3.0 can
write Java9 module info while running on Java8.


>
>> 4.) When developing a new spec we cannot easily take the EPLv2 licensed
>> sources over and modify them ourselves. We are bound to whatever Eclipse
>> publishes as snapshot. Something to consider...
>>
>
Since most of the changes in order to properly support OSGi don't
necessarily involve code changes, and are mostly about generating proper
bundle metadata I think building from the original sources isn't that hard
and what I've been mostly doing since the beginning.


>
>> Of course the upside of using the official API jars are:
>> * we do not need to do any bytecode compat signature checks anymore.
>> * the JavaDoc is MUCH better obviously
>>
>
Agreed!

So, I would support Apache rolling our own.

- Ray


>
>> Anything I missed?
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Metrics 3.0-M2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:23 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Here is the vote for our Microprofile Metrics implementation.
> It brings our compliance to v3.0-M2 spec and also provides jars without
> jaxrs part of the impl.
>
> Tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-metrics.git;a=commit;h=b870aff24346cde82415d808138239d8283f2fd7
> Dist area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/metrics/
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1122
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ]+1
> [ ] -1 ${cause}
>
> Vote will be opened as usual for 3 days or until we get enough binding
> votes.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Thinking to release geronimo-config-1.2.3

[Raymond Auge]

This would be 1.2.3 with support for MP-Config 1.4 final.

Any objections?
-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: releasing geronimo-jwt-auth?

[Raymond Auge]

The fixes we made to work with Aries CDI were never released. They however,
have been in a snapshot bundle for months.

Sincerely,
- Ray

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 1:32 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi Ray,
>
> Is there anything new on master?
>
> Le sam. 28 mars 2020 à 17:59, Raymond Auge  a
> écrit :
>
>> I'd like to call a vote for releasing geronimo-jwt-auth in the next day
>> or two.
>> Any objections?
>>
>> --
>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>>  (@rotty3000)
>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>>  (@Liferay)
>>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)

releasing geronimo-jwt-auth?

[Raymond Auge]

I'd like to call a vote for releasing geronimo-jwt-auth in the next day or
two.
Any objections?

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] release Apache JPA-2.2 spec v1.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

(I didn't see this email previously for some reason)

- Ray

On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:24 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> my own +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> Am 14.03.2020 um 12:52 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
> +1
>
> Le sam. 14 mars 2020 à 11:09, Jean-Baptiste Onofre  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> Le 14 mars 2020 à 08:53, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>>
>> Good morning!
>>
>> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache Geronimo JPA-2.2 spec API in
>> version 1.1.
>> This is a maintenance release with just the automatic module name added
>> in the manifest file.
>>
>> The staging repo is here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1121
>>
>> Sources are in
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1121/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.1/
>> sha1 is 270c2f063683fc394b9ec37ab2ffeaaaec086ef3
>>
>> Note: This release requires geronimo-genesis 2.4 which is currently up
>> for vote in another thread.
>> The staging repo for it is
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1120
>>
>>
>> Please VOTE
>>
>> [+1] yup, ship it
>> [+0] meh, I don't care
>> [-1] stop, there is a ${problem}
>>
>> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] release Apache Geronimo Genesis 2.4

[Raymond Auge]

+1

On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:24 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> my own +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> Am 13.03.2020 um 19:20 schrieb Mark Struberg :
>
> hi folks!
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE for Geronimo Genesis 2.4
>
> I've upgraded apache-parent to the latest one (23) and also added handling
> to generate Automatic-Module-Name entries in MANIFEST.MF.
> The default is the artifactId, but I suggest to set the property
>
> 
>
> to the desired value, e.g. javax.persistence for JPA.
>
> The staging repo is:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1120
>
> The source repo is
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1120/org/apache/geronimo/genesis/genesis/2.4/
> sha1 is 8aa0f4efc7f2aabd1e021a7596e50257ba80f5b9
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] yup, ship it
> [+0] meh, I don't care
> [-1] stop, there is a ${problem}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
> PS: next up will be jpa-2.2 and validation-2.0 which require this change
> for OpenJPA. If you need anything else, then just tell me.
>
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JCache Simple 1.0.4

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 4:36 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As mentionned on the list, here is the vote for our jcache implementation
> fixing OSGi-CDI metadata.
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1119/
> Here is the dev dist area:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/simple-jcache/
> Here is the tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jcache-simple.git;a=tag;h=1de835fc912962b27efe0b10bfedafcab4fd4008
> My keys is still available in
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>
> Please vote:
>
>  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JCache Simple 1.0.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 3:48 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le ven. 14 f?vr. 2020 ? 09:22, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a ?crit :
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As mentionned on the list, here is our jcache implementation release vote.
>> Main change is to enable to deploy it in OSGi adding the required
>> metadata.
>>
>> Here is the staging repo:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1118
>> Here is the dev dist area:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/simple-jcache/
>> Here is the tag:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jcache-simple.git;a=commit;h=67d00ea1d9d1775a549ce972ecb0856d35d419c7
>> My keys is still available in
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>>
>> Please vote:
>>
>>  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>>  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>>
>> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: Release simple jcache soon?

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre 
wrote:

> It sounds good to me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le 13 févr. 2020 à 18:20, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
> I just activated bundle plugin to generate a manifest to enable to use our
> simple jcache impl in OSGi.
> Any issue if we release it something like next week?
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6761 for the main issue
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache XBean 4.16

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 31/01/2020 16:41, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Here is our asm upgrade release (to v 7.3.1).
> >
> > Staging
> > repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1117
> > Tag (rev
> > 1873424):
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.16/
> > Dist (rev
> > 37817): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/xbean/4.16/
> > My key is the same than usual.
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> >  [ ] +1 let's relese it
> >  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
> >
> > This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github
> >  | LinkedIn
> >  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [XBean] 4.16 coming?

[Raymond Auge]

+1

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 5:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1 for me, go ahead.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 29/01/2020 09:27, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Any blocker to release xbean 4.16 with asm 7.3.1 upgrade?
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github
> >  | LinkedIn
> >  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4

[Raymond Auge]

Hey all, So I will cancel this vote and start a new one since I messed up
the email.

Also, this should act like a heads up that I want to do a release.

I can give it a couple of days.

- Ray

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:22 PM Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> I'd like to call a vote for release of geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4
>
> The staging repo can be found here
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116
>
> The sources are here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip
>
> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip.sha1
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] go ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
> release
>
> The staging repo can be found here
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115
>
> The sources are here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.12/
> sha1
> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.12/sha1>
> 90b2cfb57b9de11a9fba9af84dcdfb70eb295af0
>
>
> Please VOTE
>
> [+1] go ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)

[VOTE] Release geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4

[Raymond Auge]

Hello All,

I'd like to call a vote for release of geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4

The staging repo can be found here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116

The sources are here:
https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip
https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1116/content/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.4/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.4-source-release.zip.sha1

Please VOTE

[+1] go ship it
[+0] meh, don't care
[-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}

The VOTE is open for 72h.
release

The staging repo can be found here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115

The sources are here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.12/
sha1

90b2cfb57b9de11a9fba9af84dcdfb70eb295af0


Please VOTE

[+1] go ship it
[+0] meh, don't care
[-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}

The VOTE is open for 72h.


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] release Apache geronimo-openapi 1.0.12

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 11:52 PM Cesar Hernandez 
wrote:

> +1. Thanks Mark.
>
> El mar., 10 dic. 2019 a las 16:25, Mark Struberg ()
> escribió:
>
>> hi folks!
>>
>> I did run the steps for the openapi-1.0.12 release
>>
>> The staging repo can be found here
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115
>>
>> The sources are here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1115/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.12/
>> sha1
>> 
>> 90b2cfb57b9de11a9fba9af84dcdfb70eb295af0
>>
>>
>> Please VOTE
>>
>> [+1] go ship it
>> [+0] meh, don't care
>> [-1] stop there is a ${showstopper}
>>
>> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>
> --
> Atentamente:
> César Hernández.
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Arthur 1.0.0

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Sun, Dec 8, 2019, 12:55 Romain Manni-Bucau, 
wrote:

> My own +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le sam. 7 déc. 2019 à 10:14, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>
>> +1
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 05.12.2019 um 09:48 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I'd like to call a vote for our Geronimo Arthur project.
>> > As a reminder it is a light preprocessor for GraalVM which enables to
>> build native binaries from java applications (and docker images).
>> >
>> > Here is the staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1114
>> > Sources are there:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1114/org/apache/geronimo/arthur/arthur/1.0.0/arthur-1.0.0-source-release.zip
>> > Here is the tag:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-arthur.git;a=tag;h=c5c95af42dde037b383c2cacd488bd42bed1e7cb
>> > My key is the same than usual.
>> >
>> > Please vote:
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 release it
>> > [ ] -1 don't release it cause ${blocker}
>> >
>> > Vote will be opened as usual for 3 days or as needed.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] graal tooling?

[Raymond Auge]

I'm not vehemently opposed as I have done my own graal salivating and not
that I think anyone would care much even if I was completely opposed; but I
will caution that this whole graal thing is a dangerous path that Oracle
(and seemingly Redhat is just as happy to do it) are taking us all down.

Anyway +0.5

Sincerely,
- Ray

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 2:21 PM Francois Papon 
wrote:

> Hi Romain!
>
> I think it's a great idea, it make sense to have tooling around graalvm.
>
> I will be more than happy to contribute ;)
>
> "arthur" looks good to me :)
>
> regards,
>
> Françoisfpa...@apache.org
>
> Le 25/10/2019 à 09:00, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Wonder if we want to create a small project to simplify graalvm builds?
> What I have in mind is basically a kind of main (+ maven wrapper) which
> enables to use scanning at build time to prepare a binary, do the right
> RuntimeReflection.register and set the right configuration for proxies,
> resources etc.
> It would be a companion of XBean finder - which is a perfect fit for this
> phase - but likely outside of XBean since the project will likely require
> to use docker for tests - since we go native, otherwise we wouldn't build
> portably - and creates its own ecosystem.
>
> Side note: if we go with it, I'm tempted to call it "arthur", if you +1
> the idea don't hesitate to also comment on the name
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache XBean 4.15

[Raymond Auge]

+1

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:01 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Le jeu. 24 oct. 2019 à 10:13, Francois Papon 
> a écrit :
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Françoisfpa...@apache.org
>>
>> Le 23/10/2019 à 09:24, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As mentionned on the list some weeks ago we upgraded our xbean asm shade
>> to 7.2.
>> Here is the vote to let it be consumed and it is the only change to the
>> sources.
>>
>> Staging repository - with sources:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1113
>> Tag (rev 1868788):
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.15/
>> My key is the same than for last votes.
>>
>> Please vote:
>>
>>  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>>  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>>
>> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Spec JSON-P 1.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 3:48 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to call vote for our jsonp 1.3 spec jar to get out this fix:
>
> [image: Blocker] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6751
>  JSON-P 1.1
> incompliance: EmptyJsonObject incorrectly answers getString and isNull
> 
>
> Staging with sources:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1112
> My key is the same than last time
>
> Please VOTE
> [+1] Release it like that
> [-1] Don't release because ${blocker}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-security_1.0_spec API

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 11:25 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

>
> Hi!
>
> I’d like to call a VOTE on the geronimo-security_1.0_spec-1.0.jar.
> This is an API which implements the Security API JSR-375 1.0 specification
> .
>
> Here is the staging repo
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1110
>
> And the source jar which is voted on
>
> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1110/content/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-security_1.0_spec/1.0/geronimo-security_1.0_spec-1.0-source-release.zip
>
>
> My key can be found at
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>
> please VOTE
> [+1] all fine, ship it
> [+0] don't care
> [-1] stop, because ${reason}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-annotation-1.3 spec API

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:05 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I’d like to call a VOTE on the geronimo-annotation-1.3_spec-1.2 jar.
> This is an API which implements the common-annotations JSR-250 1.3
> specification.
>
> The only change was the introduction of @Repeatable on both @Resource
> and @DataSourceDefinition so that we can now pass the Jakarta TCK.
>
> Here is the staging repo
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1109/
>
> And the source jar which is voted on
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1109/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-annotation_1.3_spec/1.2/geronimo-annotation_1.3_spec-1.2-source-release.zip
>
>
> My key can be found at
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>
> please VOTE
> [+1] all fine, ship it
> [+0] don't care
> [-1] stop, because ${reason}
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h.
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.11

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 4:21 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> oops, editing the subject to ensure we vote for the 1.0.11 and not 1.0.10
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mer. 21 août 2019 à 10:21, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> a écrit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As mentionned, due to JSON-B mapping fixes I'd like to release OpenAPI
>> 1.0.11 so here is the vote. Here is the only issue we fixed:
>>
>>
>> [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6746
>>  Better alignment
>> on JSON-B for OpenAPI model
>> 
>>
>> Tag is here:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=5a9dd6a0fa41976c3314bfb4a3d8e44af70b9492
>> Sources and staging is there:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1108
>> And my key is still the same.
>>
>> Please vote:
>>
>> [ ] +1 let it go out
>> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>>
>> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.10

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 4:21 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As mentionned, due to JSON-B mapping fixes I'd like to release OpenAPI
> 1.0.11 so here is the vote. Here is the only issue we fixed:
>
>
> [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6746
>  Better alignment on
> JSON-B for OpenAPI model
> 
>
> Tag is here:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=5a9dd6a0fa41976c3314bfb4a3d8e44af70b9492
> Sources and staging is there:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1108
> And my key is still the same.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JWT Auth 1.0.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 7:39 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Le jeu. 25 juil. 2019 à 10:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 25/07/2019 09:46, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > While we are in the Microprofile release train, I'd like to release our
>> > JWT Auth impl.
>> >
>> > Changelog is the following one:
>> >
>> > P T   Key Summary AssigneeStatus  Development
>> > Major TaskGERONIMO-6724
>> >  Support Bearer
>> > Cookie   Romain
>> > Manni-Bucau
>> > <
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> >
>> > RESOLVED
>> > Major TaskGERONIMO-6725
>> >  Ensure
>> > ContainerRequestFilter header mutations are taken into account when
>> > underlying JAXRS impl supports it
>> >  Romain
>> Manni-Bucau
>> > <
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> >
>> > RESOLVED
>> > Major New Feature GERONIMO-6740
>> >  Ensure JWT-AUTH
>> > can use a provided JsonWebToken
>> >  Romain
>> Manni-Bucau
>> > <
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> >
>> > RESOLVED
>> >
>> >
>> > To summarize it: it enables to reuse the spec for more advanced but
>> > common use cases (cookie auth and impersonification/run-as).
>> >
>> > Tag is
>> > here:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jwt-auth.git;a=commit;h=513b9ee9dd6876e9c23b7774a5f422d344556897
>> > Staging is here (with
>> > sources):
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1105
>> > And my key is the same as usual.
>> >
>> > Please vote:
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 let it go out
>> > [ ] -1 ${because X}
>> >
>> > Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> >  | Old Blog
>> >  | Github
>> >  | LinkedIn
>> >  | Book
>> > <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbono...@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.10

[Raymond Auge]

+1

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 7:38 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Le jeu. 25 juil. 2019 à 10:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 25/07/2019 09:51, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > Here is the vote for our microprofile openapi implementation v1.0.10.
>> >
>> > Main changelog is about supporting context path (kudo JL) and a better
>> > support of JSON-P types to not have unexpected and wrong metadata:
>> >
>> > Major Improvement GERONIMO-6735
>> >  Support for
>> > Servlet context path in MP OpenAPI
>> >  Jean-Louis
>> > MONTEIRO
>> > <
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=jean-louis.monte...@atosorigin.com
>> >
>> > RESOLVED
>> > Major Bug GERONIMO-6739
>> >  Schema Generator
>> > does not handle properly JSON-P types
>> >  Romain
>> Manni-Bucau
>> > <
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
>> >
>> > RESOLVED
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Tag is
>> > here:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=5769273c854e26a0f9dec933854a8c457b4a2d79
>> > Sources and staging is
>> > there:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1106
>> > And my key is still the same.
>> >
>> > Please vote:
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 let it go out
>> > [ ] -1 ${because X}
>> >
>> > Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> >  | Old Blog
>> >  | Github
>> >  | LinkedIn
>> >  | Book
>> > <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbono...@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Health v1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 7:38 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Le jeu. 25 juil. 2019 à 10:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 25/07/2019 09:55, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > I'd like to release our microprofile Health implementation in v1.0.2.
>> >
>> > Main change is to support the new spec endpoints (liveness and
>> readiness).
>> >
>> > Tag is
>> > here:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-health.git;a=commit;h=4981416827cdf1a3f955a8cf80fd7c6b1ca06503
>> > Sources and staging is
>> > there:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1107
>> > And my key is still the same.
>> >
>> > Please vote:
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 let it go out
>> > [ ] -1 ${because X}
>> >
>> > Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> >  | Old Blog
>> >  | Github
>> >  | LinkedIn
>> >  | Book
>> > <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbono...@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.9

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:48 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 05.06.2019 um 10:21 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > As mentionned here is the vote for Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.9.
> >
> > The changelog is the following one:
> >
> > P T   Key Summary AssigneeStatus  Development
> >   GERONIMO-6729   Upgrade API to 1.1  Romain
> Manni-Bucau  RESOLVED
> >   GERONIMO-6730   clean up Schema - defaults shouldn't
> appear in the generated schema Romain Manni-Bucau  RESOLVED
>
> >   GERONIMO-6731   Tags can end up duplicated  Romain
> Manni-Bucau  RESOLVED
> >   GERONIMO-6732   Try to enforce operationId to be unique
> Romain Manni-Bucau  RESOLVED
> >
> >
> > Tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=7ac857d21bf2e0425d12191ca1d2a1937ba01fda
> > Staging (with sources):
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1104
> > My key is still the same.
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > [ ] +1: let's release it
> > [ ]  -1 ${cause}
> >
> > Vote will be opened as usual for 3 days or until we get 3 +1 (binding).
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: Release Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.9?

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:06 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Do we want to release our Microprofile OpenAPI implementation (v1.0.9)?
>
> Here is the diff - no worry it is the changelog not the code diff ;):
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6729
>  Upgrade API to 1.1
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6730
>  clean up Schema -
> defaults shouldn't appear in the generated schema
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6731
>  Tags can end up
> duplicated  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6732
>  Try to enforce
> operationId to be unique
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
>
> 6731 can be quite impacting since it breaks some UI AFAIK,
> 6729 can also be desired by consumers (I'm thinking to TomEE here)
>
> Anyone willing to drive this release?
> Worse case I can probably launch it in the coming days - I'll be half off
> for 2 days so will not be as fast as usually ;).
>
> Wdyt?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache XBean 4.14

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 8:21 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO 
wrote:

> Here is my own +1
>
> Le jeu. 23 mai 2019 à 15:15, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le jeu. 23 mai 2019 à 15:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 23/05/2019 15:08, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi guys,
>>> >
>>> > Here is the vote for xbean 4.14, it solves 1 issues:
>>> >
>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/XBEAN/versions/12345220
>>> >
>>> > Here is the staging repo:
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1103
>>> >
>>> > Sources are
>>> > here:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1103/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.14/
>>> > <
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1103/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.14/
>>> >
>>> > Tag is available
>>> > at: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.14/
>>>  (rev 1856524)
>>> > My keys is still available
>>> > in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
>>> > 
>>> >
>>> > Please vote:
>>> >
>>> >  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>>> >  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>>> >
>>> > This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3
>>> binding +1s.
>>> > --
>>> > Jean-Louis
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis

[Raymond Auge]

One thing to consider is there may be cases where it is desirable to retain
the javax API alongside some extra jakarta packages & types.

For example, for JAX-RS you may wish to add some newly defined jakarta
types (part of a new spec) which interact over the original javax API.

The result might be that "Jakarta EE REST" (a fictitious name for next
JAX-RS) might contain a subset of packages which, in combination with JAXRS
v2.1, also qualifies as "Jakarata EE Rest".

- Ray

On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 11:26 AM Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> so is this a matter of forking all the current specs into the new
> namespace? Or is the intention to completely change the packages in-place?
>
> - Ray
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:58 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> Hmm
>>
>> My understanding was it was getting under eclipse license as well and was
>> fully donated but can have missed some details.
>>
>> If we cant reuse them let's just create new ones and fix module name for
>> others.
>>
>> specs/ is fine since it is the same for us IMHO
>>
>> Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 18:24, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>>
>>> No, it is not the same. microprofile specs are licensed under ALv2 and
>>> we know all the legal details.
>>> For the EE specs this is by far not the same. We don't even know exactly
>>> what parts did yet get donated by Oracle to the EF.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> > Am 03.05.2019 um 18:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>>> >
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > Idnt it the exact same as for microprofile? So we dont do?
>>> >
>>> > Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 16:21, Mark Struberg  a écrit
>>> :
>>> > I've started tinkering something under specs/branches/jakarta.
>>> > It's wip but have to rush out for a few hours now.
>>> > Will continue later today.
>>> >
>>> > LieGrue,
>>> > strub
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > Am 03.05.2019 um 15:50 schrieb Mark Struberg :
>>> > >
>>> > > hi folks!
>>> > >
>>> > > You might have read todays post from Mike Milinkovich.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> https://eclipse-foundation.blog/2019/05/03/jakarta-ee-java-trademarks/
>>> > >
>>> > > It basically says that Jakarta will not be able to change a single
>>> bit in the current spec apis under the javax.* package.
>>> > > Any change has to be done in a different package.
>>> > > The Jakarta people over at Eclipse already did some voting and the
>>> new package name will be jakarta.*
>>> > >
>>> > > Thus I would like to recommend to use our IP clean geronimo-specs to
>>> setup a new project for the EE8 specs under the jakarta.* package name.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'll go forward and create a branch starting with the most important
>>> specs.
>>> > >
>>> > > Any feedback and help is welcome!
>>> > >
>>> > > LieGrue,
>>> > > strub
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis

[Raymond Auge]

so is this a matter of forking all the current specs into the new
namespace? Or is the intention to completely change the packages in-place?

- Ray

On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:58 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hmm
>
> My understanding was it was getting under eclipse license as well and was
> fully donated but can have missed some details.
>
> If we cant reuse them let's just create new ones and fix module name for
> others.
>
> specs/ is fine since it is the same for us IMHO
>
> Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 18:24, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>
>> No, it is not the same. microprofile specs are licensed under ALv2 and we
>> know all the legal details.
>> For the EE specs this is by far not the same. We don't even know exactly
>> what parts did yet get donated by Oracle to the EF.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 03.05.2019 um 18:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Idnt it the exact same as for microprofile? So we dont do?
>> >
>> > Le ven. 3 mai 2019 à 16:21, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>> > I've started tinkering something under specs/branches/jakarta.
>> > It's wip but have to rush out for a few hours now.
>> > Will continue later today.
>> >
>> > LieGrue,
>> > strub
>> >
>> >
>> > > Am 03.05.2019 um 15:50 schrieb Mark Struberg :
>> > >
>> > > hi folks!
>> > >
>> > > You might have read todays post from Mike Milinkovich.
>> > >
>> > >
>> https://eclipse-foundation.blog/2019/05/03/jakarta-ee-java-trademarks/
>> > >
>> > > It basically says that Jakarta will not be able to change a single
>> bit in the current spec apis under the javax.* package.
>> > > Any change has to be done in a different package.
>> > > The Jakarta people over at Eclipse already did some voting and the
>> new package name will be jakarta.*
>> > >
>> > > Thus I would like to recommend to use our IP clean geronimo-specs to
>> setup a new project for the EE8 specs under the jakarta.* package name.
>> > >
>> > > I'll go forward and create a branch starting with the most important
>> specs.
>> > >
>> > > Any feedback and help is welcome!
>> > >
>> > > LieGrue,
>> > > strub
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.8

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019, 06:42 Ivan Junckes Filho, 
wrote:

> +1
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 6:57 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 29/04/2019 09:41, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > here is the vote for Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.8. This is mainly for a few
>> > fixes/enhancement and to enable CXF to upgrade:
>> >
>> > Major Improvement GERONIMO-6720
>> >  The
>> > AnnotationProcessor should be able to deduct the parameter name from
>> > JAX-RS annotations
>> >  Unassigned
>> RESOLVED
>> > Major Improvement GERONIMO-6722
>> >  The
>> > AnnotationProcessor should inject media type instead of response code
>> > (when endpoint returns void or Response)
>> >  Unassigned
>> RESOLVED
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Tag:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=tag;h=b3ec68380fa2ac81424735e7aa498d679ef27307
>> > Staging (including
>> > sources):
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1102
>> > My key is the same than last time
>> >
>> > Please vote:
>> >
>> > [ ] +1: let's release it
>> > [ ]  -1 ${cause}
>> >
>> > Vote will be opened as usual for 3 days or until we get 3 +1 (binding).
>> >
>> > Side note: this is a day with a lot of bank days in France so the
>> > closing day can be missed from a few days on my side, feel free to
>> > either close it for me or I'll catch up a few days after.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> >  | Old Blog
>> >  | Github
>> >  | LinkedIn
>> >  | Book
>> > <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbono...@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache XBean 4.13

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 05:59 Francois Papon, 
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks!
>
> regards,
>
> François paponfpa...@apache.org
>
> Le 29/03/2019 à 12:45, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Here is the vote for xbean 4.13, it solves 3 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/XBEAN/versions/12344253
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1099/
> Sources are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1099/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.13/
> Tag is available at:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.13/
>  (rev 1856524)
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
>
> Please vote:
>
>  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
>
> 
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JCache Simple 1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 05:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré,  wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
> Le 29 mars 2019, à 09:59, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> We now support CompletionStage in our JCache interceptors. This is an
>> important feature for Microprofile and Java 8 integrations so here is a
>> vote for that new reease v 1.0.2.
>>
>> Here is the staging repo with sources:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1101
>> Here is the tag:
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jcache-simple.git;a=commit;h=d7a05053215ec05035ce9776ce67952989119635
>> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
>> /KEYS
>>
>> Please vote:
>>
>>  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>>  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>>
>> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.7

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 04:54 Romain Manni-Bucau, 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Here is the vote for our microprofile openapi implementation v 1.0.7. Here
> is the changelog:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10220&version=12345014
>
> It is mainly bugfixes about tag duplication and some new openrationId
> generators.
>
> Here is the tag:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=e201583a965723d3417f1cf2f5b034bc70325570
> Here is the staging repo (with sources bundles):
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1100
>
> Please vote:
>
>  [ ] +1 let's relese it
>  [ ] -1 cancel it because ${reason}
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-json_1.1 spec API jar version 1.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 12:17 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> pingping, we need 1 more binding reviewer pretty please!
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Saturday, 2 March 2019, 20:06:20 CET, Mark Struberg 
> wrote:
>
>
> hi folks!
>
> I'd like to call a vote on releasing our jsonp-1.1 api jar in version 1.2.
> This Release fixes
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6712
> which might lead to a classloader lock under concurrent load.
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1097/
>
> The source release can be found at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1097/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-json_1.1_spec/1.2/
> the sha1 is: 825ecf767288a844f68dea20d2182ae854808454
>
> So please VOTE:
>
> [+1] lets ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec api jar (take2)

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:50 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> hi folks!
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing the JPA-2.2 api (take2).
> I've updated all missing parts and did verify with the signets against the
> official jar.
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1096/
>
>
> The source release zip can be found here:
>
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1096/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
> /org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
> the sha1 is 9a8e218564b056165765f3ec562acaeb893b1048.
>
>
> So please VOTE:
>
> [+1] lets ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] [CANCELLED] Release geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec api jar

[Raymond Auge]

Sorry. fixed!

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 2:23 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> sure, here we go:
>
> [INFO] --- maven-bundle-plugin:3.5.0:bundle (default-bundle) @
> geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec ---
> [ERROR] Bundle
> org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec:bundle:1.0-SNAPSHOT :
> Bundle-Activator not found on the bundle class path nor in imports:
> org.apache.geronimo.specs.jpa.PersistenceActivator
> [ERROR] Error(s) found in bundle configuration
> [INFO]
> 
> [INFO] BUILD FAILURE
>
>
>
> :)
>
> Do you have time to figure out what this is about?
> Fixing our json spec in the meantime.
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> On Wednesday, 27 February 2019, 18:49:13 CET, Raymond Auge <
> raymond.a...@liferay.com> wrote:
>
>
> Please do some sanity checking on it first ;)
>
> - Ray
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:08 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:
>
> great thanks gonna re-roll it tonight.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> On Wednesday, 27 February 2019, 14:57:39 CET, Raymond Auge <
> raymond.a...@liferay.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hey Mark, I made a commit that does all of the above if you just want to
> take it.
>
> - Ray
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:56 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:
>
> Thanks for the catch folks!
>
> Yes we should fix the version. But we should keep it provided scoped.
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 27.02.2019 um 06:45 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > -1 to get osgi dep in compile scope, it must always be provided cause we
> rely on these jars in not osgi env too and old locator was always used if
> available only, not imposed. Think we should keep this mindset.
> >
> > Le mer. 27 févr. 2019 à 00:17, Raymond Auge 
> a écrit :
> > If you wish I could commit all of the above.
> >
> > - Ray
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:16 PM Raymond Auge 
> wrote:
> > Hey Mark,
> >
> > This is not a -1 but maybe a +0 due to I'd have liked to see a few
> changes:
> >
> > - The exported package versions being updated
> > - use official OSGi dependencies rather than the deprecated felix ones
> > - the osgi.contract version wasn't amended to add 2.2
> > - don't use the old geronimo-osgi-locator in favour of Service Loader
> Mediator
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > - Ray
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:07 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:
> > hi folks!
> >
> > I'd like to call a VOTE on releaseing the JPA-2.2 api.
> > I've updated all missing parts and did verify with the signets against
> the official jar.
> >
> > Here is the staging repo:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095
> >
> > The source release zip can be found here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
> > the sha1 is 1d9697c65938adae1cd4ef6da78108de9904133f.
> >
> >
> > So please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] lets ship it
> > [+0] meh, don't care
> > [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] [CANCELLED] Release geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec api jar

[Raymond Auge]

Please do some sanity checking on it first ;)

- Ray

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:08 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> great thanks gonna re-roll it tonight.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> On Wednesday, 27 February 2019, 14:57:39 CET, Raymond Auge <
> raymond.a...@liferay.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hey Mark, I made a commit that does all of the above if you just want to
> take it.
>
> - Ray
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:56 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:
>
> Thanks for the catch folks!
>
> Yes we should fix the version. But we should keep it provided scoped.
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 27.02.2019 um 06:45 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > -1 to get osgi dep in compile scope, it must always be provided cause we
> rely on these jars in not osgi env too and old locator was always used if
> available only, not imposed. Think we should keep this mindset.
> >
> > Le mer. 27 févr. 2019 à 00:17, Raymond Auge 
> a écrit :
> > If you wish I could commit all of the above.
> >
> > - Ray
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:16 PM Raymond Auge 
> wrote:
> > Hey Mark,
> >
> > This is not a -1 but maybe a +0 due to I'd have liked to see a few
> changes:
> >
> > - The exported package versions being updated
> > - use official OSGi dependencies rather than the deprecated felix ones
> > - the osgi.contract version wasn't amended to add 2.2
> > - don't use the old geronimo-osgi-locator in favour of Service Loader
> Mediator
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > - Ray
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:07 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:
> > hi folks!
> >
> > I'd like to call a VOTE on releaseing the JPA-2.2 api.
> > I've updated all missing parts and did verify with the signets against
> the official jar.
> >
> > Here is the staging repo:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095
> >
> > The source release zip can be found here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
> > the sha1 is 1d9697c65938adae1cd4ef6da78108de9904133f.
> >
> >
> > So please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] lets ship it
> > [+0] meh, don't care
> > [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] [CANCELLED] Release geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec api jar

[Raymond Auge]

Hey Mark, I made a commit that does all of the above if you just want to
take it.

- Ray

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:56 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Thanks for the catch folks!
>
> Yes we should fix the version. But we should keep it provided scoped.
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 27.02.2019 um 06:45 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > -1 to get osgi dep in compile scope, it must always be provided cause we
> rely on these jars in not osgi env too and old locator was always used if
> available only, not imposed. Think we should keep this mindset.
> >
> > Le mer. 27 févr. 2019 à 00:17, Raymond Auge 
> a écrit :
> > If you wish I could commit all of the above.
> >
> > - Ray
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:16 PM Raymond Auge 
> wrote:
> > Hey Mark,
> >
> > This is not a -1 but maybe a +0 due to I'd have liked to see a few
> changes:
> >
> > - The exported package versions being updated
> > - use official OSGi dependencies rather than the deprecated felix ones
> > - the osgi.contract version wasn't amended to add 2.2
> > - don't use the old geronimo-osgi-locator in favour of Service Loader
> Mediator
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > - Ray
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:07 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:
> > hi folks!
> >
> > I'd like to call a VOTE on releaseing the JPA-2.2 api.
> > I've updated all missing parts and did verify with the signets against
> the official jar.
> >
> > Here is the staging repo:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095
> >
> > The source release zip can be found here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
> > the sha1 is 1d9697c65938adae1cd4ef6da78108de9904133f.
> >
> >
> > So please VOTE:
> >
> > [+1] lets ship it
> > [+0] meh, don't care
> > [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec api jar

[Raymond Auge]

If you wish I could commit all of the above.

- Ray

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:16 PM Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> Hey Mark,
>
> This is not a -1 but maybe a +0 due to I'd have liked to see a few changes:
>
> - The exported package versions being updated
> - use official OSGi dependencies rather than the deprecated felix ones
> - the osgi.contract version wasn't amended to add 2.2
> - don't use the old geronimo-osgi-locator in favour of Service Loader
> Mediator
>
> Sincerely,
> - Ray
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:07 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:
>
>> hi folks!
>>
>> I'd like to call a VOTE on releaseing the JPA-2.2 api.
>> I've updated all missing parts and did verify with the signets against
>> the official jar.
>>
>> Here is the staging repo:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095
>>
>> The source release zip can be found here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
>> the sha1 is 1d9697c65938adae1cd4ef6da78108de9904133f.
>>
>>
>> So please VOTE:
>>
>> [+1] lets ship it
>> [+0] meh, don't care
>> [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
>>
>> The VOTE is open for 72h
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec api jar

[Raymond Auge]

Hey Mark,

This is not a -1 but maybe a +0 due to I'd have liked to see a few changes:

- The exported package versions being updated
- use official OSGi dependencies rather than the deprecated felix ones
- the osgi.contract version wasn't amended to add 2.2
- don't use the old geronimo-osgi-locator in favour of Service Loader
Mediator

Sincerely,
- Ray


On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:07 PM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> hi folks!
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE on releaseing the JPA-2.2 api.
> I've updated all missing parts and did verify with the signets against the
> official jar.
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095
>
> The source release zip can be found here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1095/org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_2.2_spec/1.0/
> the sha1 is 1d9697c65938adae1cd4ef6da78108de9904133f.
>
>
> So please VOTE:
>
> [+1] lets ship it
> [+0] meh, don't care
> [-1] stop there is a $showstopper
>
> The VOTE is open for 72h
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.6

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 7:45 AM Dennis Kieselhorst  wrote:

> +1
>
> Please pick up latest apache parent next time, see
> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-openapi/pull/9
>
> Cheers
> Dennis
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Microprofile 1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:49 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> here is the vote for Geronimo Microprofile 1.0.2,
>
> The changelog is mainly about version upgrade:
>
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6691
>  Upgrade to geronimo
> openapi 1.0.6  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: New Feature] GERONIMO-6699
>  Add a secured
> converter impl for microprofile-config
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: New Feature] GERONIMO-6700
>  Add docker
> config/secret integration
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6703
>  Upgrade safeguard
> to 1.2.1  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6704
>  Upgrade JWT Auth to
> 1.0.2  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6705
>  Upgrade rest client
> api to 1.2.0  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6706
>  Upgrade CXF MP
> client to 3.3.0  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6707
>  Upgrade geronimo
> metrics to 1.0.3  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6708
>  Upgrade openapi API
> to 1.1.1  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6709
>  Upgrade meecrowave
> to 1.2.7  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6710
>  Upgrade geronimo
> config to 1.2.2  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
>
> Tag is here:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-microprofile.git;a=commit;h=e5022da72850b45da299a9bba2adecb2d7bc5b02
> Staging is here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1094
> Sources are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1094/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-microprofile/1.0.2/
> And my key is the same as usual.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Safeguard 1.2.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:32 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 25/02/2019 09:27, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > here is the vote for Geronimo Safeguard 1.2.1,
> >
> > the only change in is the following one - but guarantees we are spec
> > compliant:
> >
> >
> > Major Bug GERONIMO-6674
> >  @Retry with jitter
> > = 0 generates error
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> >
> >
> >
> > Tag is
> > here:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-safeguard.git;a=commit;h=7ff77a7ecb3afdceab9f283252ce5a4a3a36dd63
> > Staging is
> > here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1093
> > Sources are
> > here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1093/org/apache/geronimo/safeguard/safeguard-parent/1.2.1/
> > And my key is the same as usual.
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > [ ] +1 let it go out
> > [ ] -1 ${because X}
> >
> > Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github
> >  | LinkedIn
> >  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenTracing 1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:39 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 25/02/2019 08:46, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Here is the vote for our opentracing+microprofile impl v1.0.2.
> >
> > Staging repository is available
> > at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1088
> > Sources can be found
> > at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1088/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-opentracing-parent/1.0.2/
> > Tag is available
> > at
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-opentracing.git;a=commit;h=a6498740ca00622e4b5a8934c51ff6461c6cbac4
> > My key is the same than for last votes.
> >
> > Here is the changelog:
> >
> > Major New Feature GERONIMO-6701
> >  Basic zipkin http
> > sender   Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> > Major Bug GERONIMO-6702
> > 
> > geronimo.opentracing.filter.skippedTracing.urls does not work
> >  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=romain.manni-bucau
> >
> > RESOLVED
> >
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github
> >  | LinkedIn
> >  | Book
> > <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Metrics 1.0.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:11 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> here is the vote for our metrics impl 1.0.3.
>
> Changelog is:
>
> [image: Minor] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6680
>  Add a beans.xml in
> extension to simplify the scanning in multiple servers
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Trivial] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6681
>  Ensure extensions
> don't fail when a register fails
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> Tag is here
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-metrics.git;a=commit;h=4628d00c47d762016774a2706e158f29114a242a
> Staging is here
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1092
> Sources are there
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1092/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-metrics-parent/1.0.3/
> And my key is the same as usual.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Jwt Auth 1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 2:59 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> here is the vote for Apache Geronimo Jwt Auth 1.0.2.
>
> Here changelog has one issue - who popped up on openwebbeans bugtracker
> originally:
>
> [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6697
>  Ensure issuer in
> the JWT is optional  
> Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> Tag is here
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-jwt-auth.git;a=commit;h=b10de7deff4311aecf9e993b6c939f1a8afdab59
> Staging is here
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1091
> Sources are there
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1091/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-jwt-auth/1.0.2/
> And my key is the same as usual.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Config 1.2.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 2:55 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> here is the vote for Geronimo Config 1.2.2,
>
> the only change in is the following one:
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6696
>  Support
> Optional> and Provider> injections
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
>
>
> Tag is here:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-config.git;a=commit;h=d0b5adafa7a2e31388ea2bdbb68b35f75b252ea5
> Staging is here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1090
> Sources are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1090/org/apache/geronimo/config/geronimo-config/1.2.2/
> And my key is the same as usual.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1 ${because X}
>
> Vote will stay open for 3 days or we get 3 +1 bindings vote as usual.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.5

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 9:25 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> As requested last week, here is the Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.5 vote.
>
> Staging repo can be found at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1087/
> Tag is at
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=eea43f1f245222567f51bb53bef3d877dc81bb27
> My key is the same than for last votes.
> Sources are available at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1087/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.5/
>
> FYI the changelog is:
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6683
>  Missing mapping for
> Parameter.In in OpenAPI definition
>  Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6684
>  Upgrade CXF to 3.2.7
>  Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Task] GERONIMO-6685
>  Basic integration
> test for maven plugin
>  Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6686
>  OpenAPI operationId
> is not unique 
> Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6689
>  OpenAPI default
> response is not serialized
>  Unassigned RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6690
>  OpenAPI
> StringIndexOutOfBoundsException when @Path parent has only "/"
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1, cause ${blocker}
>
> Vote will be opened for 72h as usual
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Microprofile Aggregator 1.0.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 8:17 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Here is the annouced vote for our microprofile aggregator project. Here
> are the fixed issues:
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6668
>  OpenAPI version
> requires jackson but it is not provided
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Bug] GERONIMO-6669
>  utilda packaging
> include unneeded artifacts (javax)
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6671
>  Use
> Geronimo-metrics 1.0.2
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6672
>  Use
> Geronimo-openapi 1.0.4
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: New Feature] GERONIMO-6673
>  Minimal debug UI
> for metrics, opentracing and health
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6678
>  Upgrade Meecrowave
> to 1.2.5  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> It mainly fixes openapi version of the bom - transitively utilda distro -
> and also brings the new UI module to the game.
>
> The staging repository is available at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1086
> Tag can be found at:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-microprofile.git;a=commit;h=f2bb7cff63dd0098260a8de988509e27f6eb5a46
> Sources are in:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1086/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-microprofile/1.0.1/
>
> Note: this vote depends on meecrowave and openapi releases indeed.
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1, cause ${blocker}
>
> Vote will be opened for 72h as usual
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.4 (take 2 - enum fix included)

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 8:10 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> We already have a few fixes which can be blocker for some users so i'd
> like to release our MP openapi impl. Here are the issues we fixed - and the
> enum fix i mentionned in previous vote is in:
>
> PTKeySummaryAssigneeStatusDevelopment
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6675
>  Enable to configure
> info in OpenAPI maven plugin
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6676
>  @Schema(type=ARRAY)
> is wrongly mapped  Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Major] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6677
>  Implicit class
> mapping is rarely filled properly
>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
> [image: Minor] [image: Improvement] GERONIMO-6670
>  When /openapi is
> requested with a mediatype the server does not support the response
> serialization fails  
> Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> 
> RESOLVED
>
> The staging repository is available at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1085
> Tag can be found at:
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-openapi.git;a=commit;h=51fa5bcce919594f33dc50d3259b56e730ae0c21
> Sources are in:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1085/org/apache/geronimo/geronimo-openapi/1.0.4/
>
> Please vote:
>
> [ ] +1 let it go out
> [ ] -1, cause ${blocker}
>
> Vote will be opened for 72h as usual
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo Metrics 1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 10:18 Romain Manni-Bucau  Hi guys,
>
> As mentionned here is the vote for Geronimo Metrics 1.0.2 to ensure sigar
> extension does not register twice the same filesystem when multiple mount
> points are present - which prevents the startup of any application
> embedding it.
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1083
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.3

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 10:10 Romain Manni-Bucau  Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.3 to ensure we
> don't need jackson when using it
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1082
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo Safeguard 1.2.0

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 9:33 AM Bruno Baptista  wrote:

> Thanks
> Bruno Baptista
> https://twitter.com/brunobat_
>
>
> On 18/12/18 14:25, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> The one you are in charge ;):
> https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-fault-tolerance/issues/355
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mar. 18 déc. 2018 à 15:11, Bruno Baptista  a
> écrit :
>
>> Do you have a link?
>> Bruno Baptista
>> https://twitter.com/brunobat_
>>
>>
>> On 18/12/18 14:08, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>> Yes
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le mar. 18 déc. 2018 à 14:10, Bruno Baptista  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Is this a know bug registered somewhere?
>>> Bruno Baptista
>>> https://twitter.com/brunobat_
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18/12/18 13:02, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>
>>> No, to the wrong assumption in terms if CDI exception in terms of error
>>> during the deployment. The TCK felt in an unspecified area but we applied
>>> the same workaround we have for CDI tck for both potential exception in
>>> 2.0.9.
>>> Other workarounds, as the circuit breaker bug in the TCK,  are in scope
>>> tests so we are good.
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Le mar. 18 déc. 2018 à 13:56, Bruno Baptista  a
>>> écrit :
>>>
 Was it related to this fix?

 https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-fault-tolerance/issues/323

 Cheers
 Bruno Baptista
 https://twitter.com/brunobat_


 On 18/12/18 12:53, Bruno Baptista wrote:

 Hi Romain,

 I have concerns about tweaking the test environment in order to pass
 the TCK:


 https://github.com/apache/geronimo-safeguard/blob/master/safeguard-impl/src/test/java/org/apache/safeguard/impl/tck/SafeguardTCKExtension.java#L80

 Without that, we have these failures:

 [ERROR] Failures:
 [ERROR]
 CircuitBreakerTest>Arquillian.run:138->testCircuitInitialSuccessDefaultSuccessThreshold:292
 serviceA should throw an Exception in testCircuitDefaultSuccessThreshold on
 iteration 5
 [ERROR]
 CircuitBreakerTest>Arquillian.run:138->testCircuitLateSuccessDefaultSuccessThreshold:370
 in serviceA no CircuitBreakerOpenException should be fired on iteration 1
 [INFO]
 [ERROR] Tests run: 212, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0

 You mention that the TCK leaks, can you provide further details on the
 nature of the leak and how the TCK can be improved? I don't see a filed
 issue regarding this problem.

 Cheers
 Bruno Baptista
 https://twitter.com/brunobat_


 On 18/12/18 09:42, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

 Hi guys,

 as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo Safeguard 1.2.0

 The staging repo is:
 https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
 
 075
 My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
 /KEYS
 Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.

 This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3
 binding +1s.

 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github
  | LinkedIn
  | Book
 



-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo OpenTracing 1.0.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:54 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo OpenTracing 1.0.1
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 077
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo Microprofile Aggregator

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:53 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo Microprofile 1.0.0
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 081
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Side note: indeed we depend on all other project under vote so if anyone
> fails this vote will fail - and they need to be built locally or that you
> add their staging repo in your settings.xml.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.2

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:45 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.2
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 080
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Side note: this depends on johnzon 1.1.11 - which will need to be built
> locally - and is under vote too so if johnzon's vote fails this vote will
> fail.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE]Apache Geronimo Metrics 1.0.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:54 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo Metrics 1.0.1
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 079
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo Health 1.0.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:44 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo Health 1.0.1
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 078
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apacge geronimo JWT Auth 1.0.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo JWT Auth 1.0.1
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 076
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo Config 1.2.1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:42 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo Config 1.2.1
>
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1
> 
> 074
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo.
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: Microprofile OpenAPI

[Raymond Auge]

I do personally find it very weird that MP spec would prefer YAML over JSON
when there is no YAML otherwise defined as part of the MP profile!

If I wanted to build a minimal MP it means I have to add a YAML impl when
the stack already defines JSON to be part of the stack? It makes little
sense.

Just my 2 cents,
- Ray

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:10 PM Ivan Junckes Filho 
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:34 PM Richard Monson-Haefel <
> monsonhae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> When you are setting up a MP Rest Client, there are certain annotations
>> that are required, right?  Is it possible to have the TomEE code detect
>> these MP annotations and change the default to yaml automatically?  That
>> way, yaml is only the default if you are communicating with MP-conformant
>> systems.  Just looking for a compromise here.
>>
> I still think this is an alternative and not the standard. Also, I don't
> think this would be a good solution to tie this to a microprofile lib.
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 10:25 AM Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > The goal for this is to implement Microprofile Specifications. So what
>> the
>> > Microprofile community decides is important and needs to be followed. Of
>> > course everyone has a voice there and you clearly spoke up there which
>> is
>> > great. You think it is not the best approach, but people there until now
>> > think it is. So why not respect what they decide?
>> >
>> > It would be compatible if you put yaml by default and choose to make
>> json
>> > default with a property. But making json default and adding extra
>> configs
>> > to make yaml default is not what the spec defines.
>> >
>> > This is the standard:
>> > "The default format of the /openapi endpoint is YAML.
>> >
>> > Anything different than this is what you think is the best and not a
>> > consensus in the MicroProfile community. "Stupid" is a very personal
>> > opinion and doesn't reflect what people think about it there, neither my
>> > opinion.
>> >
>> > I again, think we should follow what the standard is and change later if
>> > the community decides so.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:14 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't understand why you say so Ivan, it is perfectly compatible.
>> > >
>> > > Also to answer clearly to your question: I prefer to have an impl not
>> > > compatible with the spec when the spec says something stupid, most of
>> the
>> > > time we put toggle to be able to be compatible but sometimes there is
>> not
>> > > even a way to be compatible, this is what has been done in TomEE since
>> > > years and it works well making users happy rather than spec leads.
>> > >
>> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> > >  | Old Blog
>> > >  | Github
>> > >  | LinkedIn
>> > >  | Book
>> > > <
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le ven. 30 nov. 2018 à 17:11, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> > > a écrit :
>> > >
>> > >> This is against the spec as well, yaml is required and must always be
>> > >> default. Do we really want to let our implementation not compatible
>> with
>> > >> that?
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:03 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> If jackson yaml is present it will add a (jackson) writer for yaml,
>> if
>> > >>> not it stays on json.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> > >>>  | Old Blog
>> > >>>  | Github
>> > >>>  | LinkedIn
>> > >>>  | Book
>> > >>> <
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > >
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Le ven. 30 nov. 2018 à 16:51, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> a écrit :
>> > >>>
>> >  @Romain Manni-Bucau  not sure I understood
>> > you.
>> >  Are you saying you will work to make it compatible with the spec?
>> > Have yaml
>> >  as default?
>> > 
>> >  On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 1:30 PM César Hernández Mendoza <
>> >  cesargu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > > >
>> > > > I think regardless of what the MicroProfile team decides, we
>> need
>> > to
>> > > make
>> > > > it work as the specification says. Then iterate from there.
>> > > > In my opinion this is a big problem that makes us strongly
>> > > incompatible
>> > > > with the standard.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > El vie., 30 nov. 2018 a las 5:44, Ivan Junckes Filho (<
>> > > ivanjunc...@gmail.com>)
>> > 

Adding missing/new Spec APIs

[Raymond Auge]

Hey all,

I want to make sure I understand Geronimo's rational w.r.t. the Specs
sub-project going forward in the face of Jakarta EE and in particular on
the change in licensing, and also on the openness of the process.

I suppose what I'm trying to accomplish in the long run is to make sure it
is not required to fork the original specs because they just work as
expected for everyone (plain classpath, JPMS, AND OSGi).

I want to make sure that I put my efforts in the right place.

Thoughts?
-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache XBean 4.12 release

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 8:55 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
> Here is the vote to let us get asm7 final out.
>
> The dist (dev) area is available at
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/xbean/ (rev 30487)
> The staging repo is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1073
> Tag is http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.12/ (rev
> 1845085)
> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo
> /KEYS
>
> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: MP impl & reusability

[Raymond Auge]

I will be busy the next two weeks due to releases and conferences, but I'd
be glad to help.

I would widen the target from karaf however to simply "reusable".

- Ray

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:48 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Hi
>
> It sounds great. I would be more than happy to help. Let me ping you to
> discuss the plan.
>
> Regards
> JB
> Le 18 oct. 2018, à 08:44, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
> écrit:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I can spend some time this week and maybe the coming ones to have a look
>> at a few MP impl to check if they can be refactored to be used outside a MP
>> container. Main point would be to abstract the injection without polluting
>> too much the impl. Not yet sure it is doable but if you see some activity
>> in that area you now know the goal ;).
>>
>> The rational is to enable Karaf to reuse most of the logic - don't think
>> we can be 100% yet -  without rewriting a bunch of code.
>>
>> I will probably start with opentracing. Any help welcomed.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Apache XBean 4.11 release

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 8:07 AM Łukasz Dywicki  wrote:

> Although not binding, here is +1 from me too :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Lukasz
>
> On 10/3/18 12:22 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >> Am 03.10.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré :
> >>
> >> +1 (non binding)
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >> On 03/10/2018 09:11, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> >>> Hello everyone,
> >>>
> >>> Here is the vote to let us get asm7 shade and a fix in the multiversion
> >>> jar scanning.
> >>>
> >>> The dist (dev) area is available
> >>> at _https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/xbean/
> >>> _ (rev 29854)
> >>> The staging repo
> >>> is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1072
> >>> Tag
> >>> is http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.11/
> (rev
> >>> 1842681)
> >>> My keys is still available
> >>> in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding
> +1s.
> >>>
> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >>>  | Old Blog
> >>>  | Github
> >>>  | LinkedIn
> >>>  | Book
> >>> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >> jbono...@apache.org
> >> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: asm7 preparation

[Raymond Auge]

FYI, here's a diff of the API

https://gist.github.com/rotty3000/a68c8ea494f4c1b2e304822dc8a72a66

It doesn't look that scary tbh. Only couple methods changed which were
already marked experimental and just normalized into the regular API, same
for a couple of constants, and one other method removed and exploded into 3.

Hope this helps,
- Ray

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 9:39 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

>
> @Raymond: no worries ->
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/trunk/xbean-asm7-shaded/
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 15:37, Raymond Auge  a
> écrit :
>
>> Sorry for the newbie interruption. But can someone point me to the
>> relevant code/project/module in Geronimo that has this asm integration?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Ray
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:30 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 14:26, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Introducing our own API doesn't make much sense to me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agree cause it is not just an xbean internal
>>>
>>>
>>>> The challenges (support for new unknown Java versions) would be exactly
>>>> the same as ASM has.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It wouldn't if we would be in asm scope cause we would use a very
>>> limited set of asm features. We are kind in a situation where we use 10% of
>>> the features and expose 100% by construction :(.
>>>
>>>
>>>> So we would in the end also be forced to break the API :(
>>>> Remember that the main reason we created the whole shading for is to
>>>> allow to upgrade parts of the stack without interfering with a.) some
>>>> custom apps and b.) each other.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agree.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right now you can just swap out openjpa in TomEE for example. All you
>>>> need to do is to _potentially_ also add another xbean-asm version.
>>>> And that is good that way imo.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok so you confirm keeping the pattern we use (ie going with asm7) is ok
>>> for you?
>>>
>>> FYI the diff:
>>> https://gitlab.ow2.org/asm/asm/compare/ASM_6_2_1...ASM_7_0_BETA
>>> But some impl changes are not just fixes and even if signatures don't
>>> always change I think it is sane to not put a v7 in an asm6 package/module
>>> - same as for java 8 upgrade where the verifier was stricter.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>> > Am 01.10.2018 um 14:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 12:39, Mark Struberg  a
>>>> écrit :
>>>> > We should analyse if ASM7 is a drop-in replacement and can be used in
>>>> a backward compatible way.
>>>> >
>>>> > Didn't review everything but there are some changes in the impl which
>>>> are not compatible and why we must upgrade even if asm 6.2.1 had some good
>>>> java 11 support.
>>>> >
>>>> > If so, then we could keep the shaded o.a.g.asm6 package and just
>>>> document it.
>>>> >
>>>> > I thought about it but it sounds so dangerous and hard to control on
>>>> the long run than upgrading all our stack sounds worth it for me.
>>>> >
>>>> > If ASM7 removed some old methods, then we really should also shade to
>>>> a private asm7 package.
>>>> >
>>>> > This lead to the option to not expose ASM at all and create our own
>>>> API but it breaks the reason why all our stack uses this shade: have a
>>>> fully featured ASM usable by proxying impl of the full stack
>>>> > and share it with the scanner. This is why I thought we can't really
>>>> fake the package without serious risk, we expose a too big coverage now
>>>> (cxf, openjpa, xbean, big data engines, user apps, ...).
>>>> >
>>>> >

Re: asm7 preparation

[Raymond Auge]

Sorry for the newbie interruption. But can someone point me to the relevant
code/project/module in Geronimo that has this asm integration?

Thanks,
- Ray

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:30 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

>
>
>
> Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 14:26, Mark Struberg  a écrit :
>
>> Introducing our own API doesn't make much sense to me.
>>
>
> Agree cause it is not just an xbean internal
>
>
>> The challenges (support for new unknown Java versions) would be exactly
>> the same as ASM has.
>>
>
> It wouldn't if we would be in asm scope cause we would use a very limited
> set of asm features. We are kind in a situation where we use 10% of the
> features and expose 100% by construction :(.
>
>
>> So we would in the end also be forced to break the API :(
>> Remember that the main reason we created the whole shading for is to
>> allow to upgrade parts of the stack without interfering with a.) some
>> custom apps and b.) each other.
>>
>
> Agree.
>
>
>>
>> Right now you can just swap out openjpa in TomEE for example. All you
>> need to do is to _potentially_ also add another xbean-asm version.
>> And that is good that way imo.
>>
>
> Ok so you confirm keeping the pattern we use (ie going with asm7) is ok
> for you?
>
> FYI the diff:
> https://gitlab.ow2.org/asm/asm/compare/ASM_6_2_1...ASM_7_0_BETA
> But some impl changes are not just fixes and even if signatures don't
> always change I think it is sane to not put a v7 in an asm6 package/module
> - same as for java 8 upgrade where the verifier was stricter.
>
>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>> > Am 01.10.2018 um 14:12 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Le lun. 1 oct. 2018 à 12:39, Mark Struberg  a écrit
>> :
>> > We should analyse if ASM7 is a drop-in replacement and can be used in a
>> backward compatible way.
>> >
>> > Didn't review everything but there are some changes in the impl which
>> are not compatible and why we must upgrade even if asm 6.2.1 had some good
>> java 11 support.
>> >
>> > If so, then we could keep the shaded o.a.g.asm6 package and just
>> document it.
>> >
>> > I thought about it but it sounds so dangerous and hard to control on
>> the long run than upgrading all our stack sounds worth it for me.
>> >
>> > If ASM7 removed some old methods, then we really should also shade to a
>> private asm7 package.
>> >
>> > This lead to the option to not expose ASM at all and create our own API
>> but it breaks the reason why all our stack uses this shade: have a fully
>> featured ASM usable by proxying impl of the full stack
>> > and share it with the scanner. This is why I thought we can't really
>> fake the package without serious risk, we expose a too big coverage now
>> (cxf, openjpa, xbean, big data engines, user apps, ...).
>> >
>> >
>> > LieGrue,
>> > strub
>> >
>> >
>> > > Am 30.09.2018 um 19:44 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>> > >
>> > > Hi guys,
>> > >
>> > > Asm 7 beta was released yesterday, I'd like to try to release it ASAP.
>> > > I see 1 main point to discuss before releasing: do we keep the
>> version in the package and module name? For now it is required cause we
>> cant guarantee anything about asm compatibility.
>> > >
>> > > Options I see are:
>> > > 1. drop asm and use bcel (which is asf)
>> > > 2. drop asm and reimplement bytecode parsing for our need (but will
>> create issue in most of our stack for proxy creation IMHO)
>> > > 3. keep it like that
>> > > 4. use an "asm.*" package crossing fingers
>> > >
>> > > I'd love 4 but I fear it can create issue quickly when I see what
>> java is becoming so, personally, i think 3 is safe but since we are at
>> "that" moment I'd like to get your feedback.
>> > >
>> > > Side note: if I get no other vote than 3 before tuesday, i'll try to
>> launch the release on tuesday with asm7 module and package to let us get it
>> out.
>> > >
>> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> >
>>
>>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Validation 2.0 (spec) v1.0

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Sun, Sep 30, 2018, 11:38 Romain Manni-Bucau, 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> To enable BVal and TomEE releases, I'd like to release our validation spec
> bundle.
>
> Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1071
> The dist (dev) area is:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/specs/validation/ (rev
> 29801)
> The tag is:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-validation_2.0_spec-1.0/
> (rev 1842396)
> My key is the same as usual.
>
> Vote will be open for 3 days or until we cancel it or we get 3 +1 binding
> votes.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release XBean 4.10

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018, 11:22 Romain Manni-Bucau, 
wrote:

> My own +1
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mer. 26 sept. 2018 à 10:50, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> écrit :
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>> Le 26 sept. 2018, à 04:12, Romain Manni-Bucau  a
>> écrit:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> XBean got asm upgraded to 6.2.1 which contains some java 11 fixes (
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XBEAN-311). Here is the vote to
>>> promote it.
>>>
>>> The dist (dev) area is available at 
>>> *https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/xbean/
>>> * (rev 29700)
>>> The staging repo is:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1070
>>> Tag is http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.10/ (rev
>>> 1842004)
>>> My keys is the same as last time (available in
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS)
>>>
>>> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3
>>> binding +1s.
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>

Re: OSGi review of the geronimo-validation_2.0_spec api

[Raymond Auge]

Hey Mark,

Everything looks good for me.

Sincerely,
- Ray

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 8:44 AM Mark Struberg  wrote:

> hi folks (especially Raymond and Romain)
> Could you please check if the OSGi bits in the validation-2.0 spec module
> are proper?
>
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-validation_2.0_spec/
>
> Would love to release it as we need it for the upcoming Apache BVal-2.0
> release.
>
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Specs: interceptor 1.2 v1.1, el 2.2 v1.1, atinject 1.0 v1.1, annotation 1.3 v1.1, cdi 2.0 v1.1, jaxrs 2.1 v1.1, jbatch 1.0 v1.1, validation 2.0 v1.1, json 1.1 v1.1, jsonb 1

[Raymond Auge]

This vote has passed with 3 votes (3 binding).

I will upload the artifacts ASAP.

- Ray

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> +1
>
> - Ray
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Mark Struberg  wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 30.08.2018 um 11:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mar. 28 août 2018 à 19:30, Raymond Auge 
>> a écrit :
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'd like to call a vote on the release of the following specs:
>> >
>> > interceptor 1.2 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6628] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Interceptor 1.2
>> > * [GERONIMO-6635] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Interceptor 1.2
>> >
>> > el 2.2 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6627] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: EL 2.2
>> > * [GERONIMO-6636] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: EL 2.2
>> > ** Improvement
>> > * [GERONIMO-6624] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
>> useful for microprofile: EL 2.2
>> >
>> > atinject 1.0 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6626] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Inject 1.0
>> > * [GERONIMO-6637] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Inject 1.0
>> >
>> > annotation 1.3 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6625] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Annotation 1.3
>> > * [GERONIMO-6638] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Annotation 1.3
>> > ** Bug
>> > * [GERONIMO-6569] - javax.annotation.Resource is not compliant with
>> JSR250 mrel2/3
>> >
>> > cdi 2.0 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6631] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: CDI 2.0
>> > * [GERONIMO-6639] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: CDI 2.0
>> > ** Improvement
>> > * [GERONIMO-6617] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
>> useful for microprofile: CDI 2.0
>> >
>> > jaxrs 2.1 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6629] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Jaxrs 2.1
>> > * [GERONIMO-6640] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Jaxrs 2.1
>> > ** Improvement
>> > * [GERONIMO-6615] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
>> useful for microprofile: JAXRS 2.1
>> >
>> > jbatch 1.0 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6630] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JBatch 1.0
>> > * [GERONIMO-6641] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JBatch 1.0
>> > ** Improvement
>> > * [GERONIMO-6616] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
>> useful for microprofile: JBATCH 1.0
>> >
>> > validation 2.0 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6634] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Validation 2.0
>> > * [GERONIMO-6642] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Validation 2.0
>> > ** Improvement
>> > * [GERONIMO-6618] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
>> useful for microprofile: Validation 2.0
>> > ** Task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6581] - Bean Validation 2.0 API
>> >
>> > json 1.1 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6632] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JSONP 1.1
>> > * [GERONIMO-6643] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JSONP 1.1
>> >
>> > jsonb 1.0 v1.1
>> > ** Sub-task
>> > * [GERONIMO-6633] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JSONB 1.0
>> > * [GERONIMO-6644] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JSONB 1.0
>> > ** Improvement
>> > * [GERONIMO-6610] - Add service loader mediator metadata to JSONB
>> spec
>> >
>> > Staging repo:
>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> geronimo-1069
>> >
>> > The vote is open for 72 hours.
>> >
>> > [ ] +1
>> > [ ] +0
>> > [ ] -1
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>



-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Specs: interceptor 1.2 v1.1, el 2.2 v1.1, atinject 1.0 v1.1, annotation 1.3 v1.1, cdi 2.0 v1.1, jaxrs 2.1 v1.1, jbatch 1.0 v1.1, validation 2.0 v1.1, json 1.1 v1.1, jsonb 1

[Raymond Auge]

+1

- Ray

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Mark Struberg  wrote:

> +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 30.08.2018 um 11:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau  >:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> >
> >
> > Le mar. 28 août 2018 à 19:30, Raymond Auge  a
> écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to call a vote on the release of the following specs:
> >
> > interceptor 1.2 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6628] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Interceptor 1.2
> > * [GERONIMO-6635] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Interceptor 1.2
> >
> > el 2.2 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6627] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: EL 2.2
> > * [GERONIMO-6636] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: EL 2.2
> > ** Improvement
> > * [GERONIMO-6624] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
> useful for microprofile: EL 2.2
> >
> > atinject 1.0 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6626] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Inject 1.0
> > * [GERONIMO-6637] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Inject 1.0
> >
> > annotation 1.3 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6625] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Annotation 1.3
> > * [GERONIMO-6638] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Annotation 1.3
> > ** Bug
> > * [GERONIMO-6569] - javax.annotation.Resource is not compliant with
> JSR250 mrel2/3
> >
> > cdi 2.0 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6631] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: CDI 2.0
> > * [GERONIMO-6639] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: CDI 2.0
> > ** Improvement
> > * [GERONIMO-6617] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
> useful for microprofile: CDI 2.0
> >
> > jaxrs 2.1 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6629] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Jaxrs 2.1
> > * [GERONIMO-6640] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Jaxrs 2.1
> > ** Improvement
> > * [GERONIMO-6615] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
> useful for microprofile: JAXRS 2.1
> >
> > jbatch 1.0 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6630] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JBatch 1.0
> > * [GERONIMO-6641] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JBatch 1.0
> > ** Improvement
> > * [GERONIMO-6616] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
> useful for microprofile: JBATCH 1.0
> >
> > validation 2.0 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6634] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Validation 2.0
> > * [GERONIMO-6642] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Validation 2.0
> > ** Improvement
> > * [GERONIMO-6618] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules
> useful for microprofile: Validation 2.0
> > ** Task
> > * [GERONIMO-6581] - Bean Validation 2.0 API
> >
> > json 1.1 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6632] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JSONP 1.1
> > * [GERONIMO-6643] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JSONP 1.1
> >
> > jsonb 1.0 v1.1
> > ** Sub-task
> > * [GERONIMO-6633] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JSONB 1.0
> > * [GERONIMO-6644] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JSONB 1.0
> > ** Improvement
> > * [GERONIMO-6610] - Add service loader mediator metadata to JSONB
> spec
> >
> > Staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachegeronimo-1069
> >
> > The vote is open for 72 hours.
> >
> > [ ] +1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1
> >
> >
> > --
> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: analysis the log

[Raymond Auge]

Hello Catie,

I'm sure everyone here would love to help but I suspect you've chosen the
wrong list to send your question?

This the Apache Geronimo developer list and I suspect you are looking for
the Apache HTTP Server mailing lists which can be found here [1].

Good luck!

Sincerely,
- Ray

[1] http://httpd.apache.org/lists.html

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 4:34 AM, catie  wrote:

> I have a web page running apache on redhat , there are a apache access log
> ,
> each day have a log , we have keep these old logs
>
>  I would like to do the analysis for the user access behavior , for example
> , which url they are most access , the peak time they access the web etc.
>
>  Would advise how to do such analysis .
>
>  Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-geronimo.328035.n3.nabble.com/Development-
> f342155.html
>



-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: Safegard status

[Raymond Auge]

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> failsafe as well but as a library (us/geronimo) we don't have guarantee it
> is stable and controlled and we had some "surprises". Question can be
> phrased as such "does the time to discuss if we can implement it is
> sufficient to implement it?", IMHO it is so we can just do it for one of
> the coming release.
>
> I'll give you a simple example: commons-lang3 has some of these parts, but
> it is getting cut in N libraries which will grow independently which is the
> promise of N (N > 1) conflicts for us.
> So since the cost to have it here is very low it does worth it IMHO and we
> own a full apache stack which is very valuable for the foundation IMHO.
>

Sure. makes sense!

- Ray


> Now if the OSGi impl wants to donate it to ASF we can merge both.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le jeu. 30 août 2018 à 19:42, Raymond Auge  a
> écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, overall idea is to not conflict at all and stay light (stack
>>> generally are not worth it for these specs from my experience)
>>>
>>
>> Oh, it's self implemented. i.e. you don't have N implementation. You
>> simply use the utility library and doesn't need an OSGi framework at all.
>> You can use it in plain Java.
>>
>> - Ray
>>
>>
>>> so I still think the original plan is ok and technically it is easy and
>>> enables us to make our ecosystem (asf with tomee, owb etc) consistent.
>>>
>>> That said we can be pluggable ;)
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 30 août 2018 19:14, Raymond Auge  a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> Romain, you may not have seen this, but the OSGi Alliance worked on a
>>>> (self-implemented) library (yes a non-OSGi library :) ) that might prove
>>>> useful. It is very tiny so perhaps it could simply be embedded into the
>>>> geronimo safeguard implementation.
>>>>
>>>> Promises
>>>> ===
>>>> maven dep [1]
>>>> spec [2]
>>>>
>>>> Considering the details of the fault tolerance specification (which
>>>> honestly I have only read the readme ;) )
>>>>
>>>>-
>>>>
>>>>TimeOut: Define a duration for timeout
>>>>Promises supports timeouts natively
>>>>-
>>>>
>>>>RetryPolicy: Define a criteria on when to retry
>>>>I think this is pretty easy to implement on Promises using a
>>>>timeout + a fallback
>>>>-
>>>>
>>>>Fallback: provide an alternative solution for a failed execution.
>>>>Promises supports fallbacks natively
>>>>-
>>>>
>>>>Bulkhead: isolate failures in part of the system while the rest
>>>>part of the system can still function.
>>>>If this is referring to executing tasks without blocking +
>>>>callbacks + failure states, and such, then this is a native ability of
>>>>Promises.
>>>>-
>>>>
>>>>CircuitBreaker: offer a way of fail fast by automatically failing
>>>>execution to prevent the system overloading and indefinite wait or 
>>>> timeout
>>>>by the clients.
>>>>Plenty of features to combine for this.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought!
>>>> - Ray
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://search.maven.org/search?q=a:org.osgi.util.promise
>>>> [2] https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/util.promise.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Bruno,
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing crazy AFAIK, the only task I have in mind (but is not yet
>>>>> started) was to drop failsafe dependency to align this library on other
>>>>> geronimo ones (dep free)
>>>>> and own the implementation.
>>>>>
>&g

Re: Safegard status

[Raymond Auge]

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Well, overall idea is to not conflict at all and stay light (stack
> generally are not worth it for these specs from my experience)
>

Oh, it's self implemented. i.e. you don't have N implementation. You simply
use the utility library and doesn't need an OSGi framework at all. You can
use it in plain Java.

- Ray


> so I still think the original plan is ok and technically it is easy and
> enables us to make our ecosystem (asf with tomee, owb etc) consistent.
>
> That said we can be pluggable ;)
>
> Le jeu. 30 août 2018 19:14, Raymond Auge  a
> écrit :
>
>> Romain, you may not have seen this, but the OSGi Alliance worked on a
>> (self-implemented) library (yes a non-OSGi library :) ) that might prove
>> useful. It is very tiny so perhaps it could simply be embedded into the
>> geronimo safeguard implementation.
>>
>> Promises
>> ===
>> maven dep [1]
>> spec [2]
>>
>> Considering the details of the fault tolerance specification (which
>> honestly I have only read the readme ;) )
>>
>>-
>>
>>TimeOut: Define a duration for timeout
>>Promises supports timeouts natively
>>-
>>
>>RetryPolicy: Define a criteria on when to retry
>>I think this is pretty easy to implement on Promises using a timeout
>>+ a fallback
>>-
>>
>>Fallback: provide an alternative solution for a failed execution.
>>Promises supports fallbacks natively
>>-
>>
>>Bulkhead: isolate failures in part of the system while the rest part
>>of the system can still function.
>>If this is referring to executing tasks without blocking + callbacks
>>+ failure states, and such, then this is a native ability of Promises.
>>-
>>
>>CircuitBreaker: offer a way of fail fast by automatically failing
>>execution to prevent the system overloading and indefinite wait or timeout
>>by the clients.
>>Plenty of features to combine for this.
>>
>> Just a thought!
>> - Ray
>>
>> [1] https://search.maven.org/search?q=a:org.osgi.util.promise
>> [2] https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/util.promise.html
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Bruno,
>>>
>>> Nothing crazy AFAIK, the only task I have in mind (but is not yet
>>> started) was to drop failsafe dependency to align this library on other
>>> geronimo ones (dep free)
>>> and own the implementation.
>>>
>>> Feel free to grab any task you want.
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 30 août 2018 à 11:58, bruno...@gmail.com  a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I'm interested in contributing to Geronimo Safegard and help to add the
>>>> new features in the upcoming Fault Tolerance 1.2 Spec.
>>>> Is there any work being executed or currently planed for this library?
>>>> Cheers!
>>>> --
>>>> Bruno Baptista
>>>> http://twitter.com/brunobat_
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>>  (@rotty3000)
>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>>  (@Liferay)
>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
>> (@OSGiAlliance)
>>
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: Safegard status

[Raymond Auge]

Romain, you may not have seen this, but the OSGi Alliance worked on a
(self-implemented) library (yes a non-OSGi library :) ) that might prove
useful. It is very tiny so perhaps it could simply be embedded into the
geronimo safeguard implementation.

Promises
===
maven dep [1]
spec [2]

Considering the details of the fault tolerance specification (which
honestly I have only read the readme ;) )

   -

   TimeOut: Define a duration for timeout
   Promises supports timeouts natively
   -

   RetryPolicy: Define a criteria on when to retry
   I think this is pretty easy to implement on Promises using a timeout + a
   fallback
   -

   Fallback: provide an alternative solution for a failed execution.
   Promises supports fallbacks natively
   -

   Bulkhead: isolate failures in part of the system while the rest part of
   the system can still function.
   If this is referring to executing tasks without blocking + callbacks +
   failure states, and such, then this is a native ability of Promises.
   -

   CircuitBreaker: offer a way of fail fast by automatically failing
   execution to prevent the system overloading and indefinite wait or timeout
   by the clients.
   Plenty of features to combine for this.

Just a thought!
- Ray

[1] https://search.maven.org/search?q=a:org.osgi.util.promise
[2] https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/util.promise.html



On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi Bruno,
>
> Nothing crazy AFAIK, the only task I have in mind (but is not yet started)
> was to drop failsafe dependency to align this library on other geronimo
> ones (dep free)
> and own the implementation.
>
> Feel free to grab any task you want.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le jeu. 30 août 2018 à 11:58, bruno...@gmail.com  a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm interested in contributing to Geronimo Safegard and help to add the
>> new features in the upcoming Fault Tolerance 1.2 Spec.
>> Is there any work being executed or currently planed for this library?
>> Cheers!
>> --
>> Bruno Baptista
>> http://twitter.com/brunobat_
>>
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: safeguard's TCK status

[Raymond Auge]

Got it!

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 3:57 PM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> Unfortunately the TCK tests have timing issues.  They are
> non-deterministic.
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018, 15:15 Raymond Auge  wrote:
>
>> must have been a first checkout, temporal kinda thing.
>>
>> Sorry for the noise,
>> - Ray
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Raymond Auge 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've just forked geronimo-safeguard but it is failing the TCK. Is that
>>> expected status?
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>>>  (@rotty3000)
>>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>>>  (@Liferay)
>>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
>>> (@OSGiAlliance)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>>  (@rotty3000)
>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>>  (@Liferay)
>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
>> (@OSGiAlliance)
>>
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: safeguard's TCK status

[Raymond Auge]

must have been a first checkout, temporal kinda thing.

Sorry for the noise,
- Ray

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> I've just forked geronimo-safeguard but it is failing the TCK. Is that
> expected status?
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>



-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

safeguard's TCK status

[Raymond Auge]

I've just forked geronimo-safeguard but it is failing the TCK. Is that
expected status?

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

[VOTE] Release Geronimo Specs: interceptor 1.2 v1.1, el 2.2 v1.1, atinject 1.0 v1.1, annotation 1.3 v1.1, cdi 2.0 v1.1, jaxrs 2.1 v1.1, jbatch 1.0 v1.1, validation 2.0 v1.1, json 1.1 v1.1, jsonb 1.0 v

[Raymond Auge]

Hi,

I'd like to call a vote on the release of the following specs:

*interceptor 1.2 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6628] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Interceptor 1.2
* [GERONIMO-6635] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Interceptor 1.2

*el 2.2 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6627] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: EL 2.2
* [GERONIMO-6636] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: EL 2.2
** Improvement
* [GERONIMO-6624] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules useful
for microprofile: EL 2.2

*atinject 1.0 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6626] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Inject 1.0
* [GERONIMO-6637] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Inject 1.0

*annotation 1.3 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6625] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Annotation 1.3
* [GERONIMO-6638] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Annotation 1.3
** Bug
* [GERONIMO-6569] - javax.annotation.Resource is not compliant with
JSR250 mrel2/3

*cdi 2.0 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6631] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: CDI 2.0
* [GERONIMO-6639] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: CDI 2.0
** Improvement
* [GERONIMO-6617] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules useful
for microprofile: CDI 2.0

*jaxrs 2.1 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6629] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Jaxrs 2.1
* [GERONIMO-6640] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Jaxrs 2.1
** Improvement
* [GERONIMO-6615] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules useful
for microprofile: JAXRS 2.1

*jbatch 1.0 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6630] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JBatch 1.0
* [GERONIMO-6641] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JBatch 1.0
** Improvement
* [GERONIMO-6616] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules useful
for microprofile: JBATCH 1.0

*validation 2.0 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6634] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: Validation 2.0
* [GERONIMO-6642] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: Validation 2.0
** Improvement
* [GERONIMO-6618] - Apply service loader mediator to key modules useful
for microprofile: Validation 2.0
** Task
* [GERONIMO-6581] - Bean Validation 2.0 API

*json 1.1 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6632] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JSONP 1.1
* [GERONIMO-6643] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JSONP 1.1

*jsonb 1.0 v1.1*
** Sub-task
* [GERONIMO-6633] - Apply Portable Java Contracts: JSONB 1.0
* [GERONIMO-6644] - Consume Portable Java Contracts: JSONB 1.0
** Improvement
* [GERONIMO-6610] - Add service loader mediator metadata to JSONB spec

Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1069

The vote is open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1


-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance  (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: geronimo-config-impl CDI beans

[Raymond Auge]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Raymond Auge 
wrote:

> Romain, to clarify your question about testing, which I'm only now finally
> grasped; I wouldn't want to add such tests just yet because the OSGi CDI
> integration spec is not final, nor is the RI. So I wouldn't want to add
> SNAPSHOT things into the already usable geronimo-config-impl.
>
> However, once it's final it will be very simple to add tests just like you
> have for the other runtimes.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> - Ray
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Mark Struberg  wrote:
>
>> In any case we must guarantee that the beans we need do not get picked up
>> twice (via Extension manually + scanning).
>>
>> > The OSGi CDI spec is based on CDI 2.0. We didn't want to build
>> something new that started with legacy.
>>
>> Except that EE8 is not yet widely used.
>> But having geronimo-config based on EE7 doesn't restrict osgi-cdi from
>> using it. It's all perfectly backward compatible.
>>
>
Very true!
- Ray


>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 21.08.2018 um 20:16 schrieb Raymond Auge :
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > You can always add the package in se mode. But long story short a
>> beans.xml solution is still recommanded over annotated mode which kind of
>> failed by its spec.
>> >
>> > Keeping the beans.xml is no harm (for OSGi CDI) provided the beans are
>> added via the SPI also (is that an issue?) OSGi CDI will simply ignore the
>> beans.xml (in portable extension bundles).
>> >
>> > The reason this is the case is that the OSGi CDI wants to be able to
>> preserve the sanctity of the class spaces between bundles providing
>> extensions and bundles providing the application beans. This way OSGi CDI
>> doesn't have to operate at all on any classes of the portable extension
>> bundles, it consumes the extension implementations as services, the
>> services add the beans programmatically and the separate is nice and clean.
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mar. 21 août 2018 19:51, John D. Ament  a
>> écrit :
>> > I would have to double check in SE mode but I think the archive would
>> be ignored without a beans.xml, at least with weld.
>> >
>> > Like I said, we could keep the beams.xml it's not a problem.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 13:46 Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>> > We can move all the code to extensions but id be for it only using cdi2
>> as a base to avoid useless code.
>> >
>> > That would be my preference as well.
>> >
>> >
>> > Annotated mode doesnt support producers sadly.
>> >
>> > Now my question is why osgi cdi doesnt support cdi 1.0 spec? We dont
>> use more in config impl I think.
>> >
>> > The OSGi CDI spec is based on CDI 2.0. We didn't want to build
>> something new that started with legacy.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > - Ray
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mar. 21 août 2018 19:26, Raymond Auge  a
>> écrit :
>> > I notice that there's a beans.xml file in the config impl. I'm also
>> seeing that some beans are explicitly added via the SPI in ConfigExtension.
>> >
>> > Are there any beans which would be found via `annotated` beans
>> discovery which are _not_ explicitly added in the extension? I also see
>> that there are plenty of Vitoed classes.
>> >
>> > I'm wondering if we could unify things to not use beans.xml at all, and
>> only use the extension SPI. This would ensure that things always work with
>> the new OSGi CDI spec.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
>> > Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>> > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance (@OSGiAlliance)
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>



-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)