Re: 2.0 release status
On Aug 6, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote: On 8/6/07, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip 2.0 Release Matt and I have been working on updating branches/2.0.0 in preparation for a release. At the moment, the build is failing because of an xmlbeans version incompatibility. I haven't worked out the cause of this problem, yet. Once we're able to build, we can start testing and get a release vote started. This vote either cover the above specs/schemas/components releases or the vote would be dependent on separate release votes. I do not know if this information is of great help and if the module I am referring here is the one causing build failure. I only hope it is useful. When I build modules\geronimo-j2ee- builder, I get a build failure with XmlBeans compile failed. If I use IBMJDK1.5.0 it builds fine, but, without the tests on. I remember running into a similar problem attempting to build G1.1 or 1.2 (I don't remember exactly) with IBMJDK and that time I had to tweak some exclusion tags to get past some errors. This is what prompted me to attempt if that module builds fine using IBMJDK. I have no explanation why the module builds fine in branches\2.0. Turned out the problem was a bad geronimo-schema-j2ee_1.4 version. We were using 1.1-SNAPSHOT (which is wrong should be 1.2-SNAPSHOT) and switched to 1.1 for the release. This changed mavens classloading during the build in some subtle way. Fixing the version fixed the test error. Thanks to David Jencks for a helping hand... --kevan
Re: 2.0 release status
On Aug 6, 2007, at 9:16 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. As David Jencks reminded me, we're not building the schema jars from CDDL licensed materials. I'm convinced that what we're doing is valid. So, I'm withdrawing my objections on the schema releases. I think we should move our schemas to use CDDL licensed schemas. I think that's the right direction. However, that doesn't have to occur immediately. What we have works and is valid, in my estimation. So, let's ship it... --kevan
2.0 release status
Here's where things stand at the moment Specs We have a vote on 3 spec releases that have been held up by a CDDL licensing issue. After reviewing the issues, I don't think these specs have a problem. They are not built with CDDL licensed materials. We could start to rebase our specs on CDDL licensed materials. I think this would make things cleaner. However, I don't think that it is necessary to do that now. Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. TX-Manager and Connector components The recently released 2.0 version of geronimo-connector has a problem. The geronimo-connector-2.0-tests.jar does not contain any classes. So, server builds fail when running tests. Matt has created a 2.0.1 release. We'll need to vote on this new release. 2.0 Release Matt and I have been working on updating branches/2.0.0 in preparation for a release. At the moment, the build is failing because of an xmlbeans version incompatibility. I haven't worked out the cause of this problem, yet. Once we're able to build, we can start testing and get a release vote started. This vote either cover the above specs/schemas/components releases or the vote would be dependent on separate release votes. --kevan
Re: 2.0 release status
On Aug 6, 2007, at 6:16 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: Here's where things stand at the moment Specs We have a vote on 3 spec releases that have been held up by a CDDL licensing issue. After reviewing the issues, I don't think these specs have a problem. They are not built with CDDL licensed materials. We could start to rebase our specs on CDDL licensed materials. I think this would make things cleaner. However, I don't think that it is necessary to do that now. It would also make it so we couldn't release them according to the draft 3rd party licensing policy at http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/ 3party.html which prohibits cddl source code in apache releases (Categoy B). Sam has indicated that xsds are source code in his opinion and I certainly agree. Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. I believe the copies under vote are NOT built from CDDL but from the previous non-cddl xsds. I guess only Prasad knows for sure. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think they are correct , since the jars are not built from cddl sources. In any case I think that (in disagreement to Craig Russell) that even if we started with CDDL schemas the xmlbeans generated source and binary would be under asf, not cddl. If not, then the xmlbeans code we've been using generated from the pre-cddl schemas would be under the mysterious sun license that prohibits all use, so we wouldn't be able to write a javaee server in the first place. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. I don't think we should do this until the violent disagreement between the 3rd party licensing policy and sam's suggestion that it's ok to use the cddl xsds is resolved. thanks david jencks TX-Manager and Connector components The recently released 2.0 version of geronimo-connector has a problem. The geronimo-connector-2.0-tests.jar does not contain any classes. So, server builds fail when running tests. Matt has created a 2.0.1 release. We'll need to vote on this new release. 2.0 Release Matt and I have been working on updating branches/2.0.0 in preparation for a release. At the moment, the build is failing because of an xmlbeans version incompatibility. I haven't worked out the cause of this problem, yet. Once we're able to build, we can start testing and get a release vote started. This vote either cover the above specs/schemas/components releases or the vote would be dependent on separate release votes. --kevan
Re: 2.0 release status
On 8/6/07, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's where things stand at the moment Specs We have a vote on 3 spec releases that have been held up by a CDDL licensing issue. After reviewing the issues, I don't think these specs have a problem. They are not built with CDDL licensed materials. We could start to rebase our specs on CDDL licensed materials. I think this would make things cleaner. However, I don't think that it is necessary to do that now. Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. TX-Manager and Connector components The recently released 2.0 version of geronimo-connector has a problem. The geronimo-connector-2.0-tests.jar does not contain any classes. So, server builds fail when running tests. Matt has created a 2.0.1 release. We'll need to vote on this new release. 2.0 Release Matt and I have been working on updating branches/2.0.0 in preparation for a release. At the moment, the build is failing because of an xmlbeans version incompatibility. I haven't worked out the cause of this problem, yet. Once we're able to build, we can start testing and get a release vote started. This vote either cover the above specs/schemas/components releases or the vote would be dependent on separate release votes. I do not know if this information is of great help and if the module I am referring here is the one causing build failure. I only hope it is useful. When I build modules\geronimo-j2ee-builder, I get a build failure with XmlBeans compile failed. If I use IBMJDK1.5.0 it builds fine, but, without the tests on. I remember running into a similar problem attempting to build G1.1 or 1.2 (I don't remember exactly) with IBMJDK and that time I had to tweak some exclusion tags to get past some errors. This is what prompted me to attempt if that module builds fine using IBMJDK. I have no explanation why the module builds fine in branches\2.0. --vamsi --kevan
Re: 2.0 release status
This is crude!! First I ran the build on modules\geronimo-j2ee-builder with IBMJDK1.5.0 with tests turned off to be able to build the module. Then I ran the build (not a clean build) with SunJDK1.5.0 with tests on and the tests passed!! --vamsi On 8/6/07, Vamsavardhana Reddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/6/07, Kevan Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's where things stand at the moment Specs We have a vote on 3 spec releases that have been held up by a CDDL licensing issue. After reviewing the issues, I don't think these specs have a problem. They are not built with CDDL licensed materials. We could start to rebase our specs on CDDL licensed materials. I think this would make things cleaner. However, I don't think that it is necessary to do that now. Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. TX-Manager and Connector components The recently released 2.0 version of geronimo-connector has a problem. The geronimo-connector-2.0-tests.jar does not contain any classes. So, server builds fail when running tests. Matt has created a 2.0.1 release. We'll need to vote on this new release. 2.0 Release Matt and I have been working on updating branches/2.0.0 in preparation for a release. At the moment, the build is failing because of an xmlbeans version incompatibility. I haven't worked out the cause of this problem, yet. Once we're able to build, we can start testing and get a release vote started. This vote either cover the above specs/schemas/components releases or the vote would be dependent on separate release votes. I do not know if this information is of great help and if the module I am referring here is the one causing build failure. I only hope it is useful. When I build modules\geronimo-j2ee-builder, I get a build failure with XmlBeans compile failed. If I use IBMJDK1.5.0 it builds fine, but, without the tests on. I remember running into a similar problem attempting to build G1.1 or 1.2 (I don't remember exactly) with IBMJDK and that time I had to tweak some exclusion tags to get past some errors. This is what prompted me to attempt if that module builds fine using IBMJDK. I have no explanation why the module builds fine in branches\2.0. --vamsi --kevan
Re: 2.0 release status
Here are my results - 1) Rebuilt Specs 1.4 and 1.5 on Linux with Sun 1.5.0_11 and the released maven-xmlbeans-plugin-2.3.1. 2) Built the server on Linux w/ IBM 1.5.0 SR4 (except for geronimo-corba which requires Sun JDK) with the released maven-xmlbeans-plugin-2.3.1 and tests enabled - everything built. I also built the server on Linux w/ Sun 1.5.0_11 using the specs I rebuilt in #1 above and everything worked Maybe the specs and server have to be built with the same maven-xmlbeans-plugin level??? -Donald Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote: On 8/6/07, *Kevan Miller* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's where things stand at the moment Specs We have a vote on 3 spec releases that have been held up by a CDDL licensing issue. After reviewing the issues, I don't think these specs have a problem. They are not built with CDDL licensed materials. We could start to rebase our specs on CDDL licensed materials. I think this would make things cleaner. However, I don't think that it is necessary to do that now. Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. TX-Manager and Connector components The recently released 2.0 version of geronimo-connector has a problem. The geronimo-connector-2.0-tests.jar does not contain any classes. So, server builds fail when running tests. Matt has created a 2.0.1 release. We'll need to vote on this new release. 2.0 Release Matt and I have been working on updating branches/2.0.0 in preparation for a release. At the moment, the build is failing because of an xmlbeans version incompatibility. I haven't worked out the cause of this problem, yet. Once we're able to build, we can start testing and get a release vote started. This vote either cover the above specs/schemas/components releases or the vote would be dependent on separate release votes. I do not know if this information is of great help and if the module I am referring here is the one causing build failure. I only hope it is useful. When I build modules\geronimo-j2ee-builder, I get a build failure with XmlBeans compile failed. If I use IBMJDK1.5.0 it builds fine, but, without the tests on. I remember running into a similar problem attempting to build G1.1 or 1.2 (I don't remember exactly) with IBMJDK and that time I had to tweak some exclusion tags to get past some errors. This is what prompted me to attempt if that module builds fine using IBMJDK. I have no explanation why the module builds fine in branches\2.0. --vamsi --kevan smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: 2.0 release status
On Aug 6, 2007, at 11:25 AM, David Jencks wrote: On Aug 6, 2007, at 6:16 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: Here's where things stand at the moment Specs We have a vote on 3 spec releases that have been held up by a CDDL licensing issue. After reviewing the issues, I don't think these specs have a problem. They are not built with CDDL licensed materials. We could start to rebase our specs on CDDL licensed materials. I think this would make things cleaner. However, I don't think that it is necessary to do that now. It would also make it so we couldn't release them according to the draft 3rd party licensing policy at http://people.apache.org/ ~cliffs/3party.html which prohibits cddl source code in apache releases (Categoy B). Sam has indicated that xsds are source code in his opinion and I certainly agree. I also agree that they are source code. According to the draft 3rd party licensing policy, you are correct. I used to treat that very literally. However, we have also gotten a clear advice from Sam Ruby, a member and current chair of the ASF legal team, that the use of CDDL schemas is ok. In fact, Sam has instructed all projects to replace Sun Proprietary/confidential dtd's and xsd's with their CDDL equivalent. As long as the Geronimo PMC agrees and we follow the rules of the CDDL license, I don't see a problem. I think we're better off. Schemas We have an outstanding vote on two schema releases. These releases are built from CDDL licensed materials. I believe the copies under vote are NOT built from CDDL but from the previous non-cddl xsds. I guess only Prasad knows for sure. I believe you are correct. I got ahead of myself. At the moment, the license and notice files for the schema releases are not correct. I think they are correct , since the jars are not built from cddl sources. In any case I think that (in disagreement to Craig Russell) that even if we started with CDDL schemas the xmlbeans generated source and binary would be under asf, not cddl. If not, then the xmlbeans code we've been using generated from the pre-cddl schemas would be under the mysterious sun license that prohibits all use, so we wouldn't be able to write a javaee server in the first place. I'm going to skip this for now. We can come back to it, if you still feel we should not move to CDDL licensed schemas. I think we should do the following: move the schema source directories from our tck svn repository to our public repository, fix our license and notice files, and build schema releases from there. Note that both the schema source directories and the resultant schema binaries will have CDDL licensed elements. The current guidance that we have received from legal-discuss is that both source and binary CDDL is ok for us to release. We will need to be sure that our schemas follow all CDDL requirements. I don't think we should do this until the violent disagreement between the 3rd party licensing policy and sam's suggestion that it's ok to use the cddl xsds is resolved. I don't think there's a violent disagreement. I think Sam's opinion on the matter carries a lot of weight and also makes a lot of sense. There was some discussion about whether or not schemas are source or binary. Seems we both agree they are source. So, let's assume they are source and treat them accordingly. There is also some discussion about whether xmlbeans or jaxb generated code would inherit a CDDL license. This may be debatable. Best case the code is ASL. Worst case it's ASL+CDDL or even just CDDL. IMO, we can deal just fine with all of those cases. So, let's make our best call on the appropriate license for the schema jars. IMO, we end up in a better situation. In particular, we move our schema code out of tck svn -- this seems like a very, very good thing to me. Other than the overhead of moving some code, building new release candidates, and minor mods to license/notice files, I don't see a downside... --kevan
Re: 2.0 release status
--- Vamsavardhana Reddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is crude!! First I ran the build on modules\geronimo-j2ee-builder with IBMJDK1.5.0 with tests turned off to be able to build the module. Then I ran the build (not a clean build) with SunJDK1.5.0 with tests on and the tests passed!! --vamsi ... When I build modules\geronimo-j2ee-builder, I get a build failure with XmlBeans compile failed. I recently ran into a similar problem. In my case I ran mvn clean on modules, which downloaded the latest xmlbeans plugin but it did not update its dependencies!!! One could say it does not need them to perform clean operation. Later when j2ee-builder was being built, I got the error you mentioned. I deleted xmlbeans plugin from .m2 repo and built using mvn from geronoimo-j2ee-builder (or modules) directory. This time the plugin and all its dependencies were downloaded and the build was successful. So if a plugin is downloaded/updated during mvn clean, its dependencies may not be the latest. It's a maven thing... Thanks Anita Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
