[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
rmannibucau edited a comment on pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662717134 @cocorossello right, should be ==. To run tcks just go in tck module and run cdi submodules. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
rmannibucau commented on pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662717134 @cocorossello right, should be == This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662707022 I can confirm that changing the condition: if (phase == null || phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS) to if (phase == null || phase == TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS) makes the SchedulerTest and the EventTest pass (I don't know how to run tck tests, sorry) This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
cocorossello commented on pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662707022 I can confirm that changing the condition: if (phase == null || phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS) to if (phase == null || phase == TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS) makes the SchedulerTest pass (haven't tested others) This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
cocorossello commented on pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662704395 @rmannibucau can you please take a look on latest comment? This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662703666
Hi, there is something I don't understand.
Looking at the SchedulerTest:
It works in OWB 2.0.12 and it doesn't in 2.0.16 or 17.
The stacktrace (2.0.16) is:
at
org.apache.webbeans.ee.event.TransactionalEventNotifier.registerTransactionSynchronization(TransactionalEventNotifier.java:106)
at
org.apache.openejb.cdi.OpenEJBTransactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(OpenEJBTransactionService.java:94)
at
org.apache.webbeans.event.NotificationManager.doFireSync(NotificationManager.java:726)
at
org.apache.webbeans.event.NotificationManager.doFireEvent(NotificationManager.java:662)
at
org.apache.webbeans.event.NotificationManager.fireEvent(NotificationManager.java:646)
at
org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.fireEvent(BeanManagerImpl.java:495)
at
org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.fireEvent(BeanManagerImpl.java:469)
at
org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.fireEvent(BeanManagerImpl.java:453)
at
org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectableBeanManager.fireEvent(InjectableBeanManager.java:109)
at org.superbiz.schedule.events.Scheduler.timeout(Scheduler.java:54)
In 2.0.12 version is calling
invokeObserverMethod(event, metadata, observer);
and in 2.0.16 is going for
transactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(phase, observer, event);
So it has to do something with this commit:
https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/50a97460d3e824f298c52f98195a7d7ea5ac52af#diff-861b38d68e2a8d4b2ea08ab08d7ac29e
This is 2.0.12:
if(phase != null && phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
{
if (async)
{
throw new WebBeansConfigurationException("Async
Observer Methods can only use TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS!");
}
TransactionService transactionService =
webBeansContext.getService(TransactionService.class);
if(transactionService != null)
{
transactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(phase, observer, event);
}
else
{
invokeObserverMethod(event, metadata, observer);
}
}
else
{
if (async)
{
completableFutures.add(invokeObserverMethodAsync(event, metadata, observer,
notificationOptions));
}
else
{
invokeObserverMethod(event, metadata, observer);
}
}
(so when phase is IN_PROGRESS it won't try to get the TransactionService)
and this is 2.0.16:
if (phase == null || phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
{
invokeObserverMethod(context, observer);
}
else
{
TransactionService transactionService =
webBeansContext.getTransactionService();
if(transactionService != null)
{
transactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(phase, observer,
context.getEvent());
}
else
{
invokeObserverMethod(context, observer);
}
}
(So when phase is IN_PROGRESS it will get the transactionService and it
fails with that message).
Is this condition correct in 2.0.16?
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] jgallimore commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
jgallimore commented on pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662613273 We still have a number of test failures with this - here's the list of tests that fail for me: Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 5.558 sec <<< FAILURE! observe(org.superbiz.cdi.events.EventTest) Time elapsed: 4.01 sec <<< FAILURE! Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 61.615 sec <<< FAILURE! test(org.superbiz.schedule.events.SchedulerTest) Time elapsed: 61.573 sec <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] Tests run: 1584, Failures: 21, Errors: 0, Skipped: 36, Time elapsed: 336.729 s <<< FAILURE! - in TestSuite [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.async.RequestScopeEventAsyncTest) Time elapsed: 40.635 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.jms.RequestScopeEventMessageDeliveryTest) Time elapsed: 0.294 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.timeout.RequestScopeEventTimeoutTest) Time elapsed: 0.246 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] resolutionWithRepeatableQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.definition.qualifier.repeatable.RepeatableQualifiersTest) Time elapsed: 0.007 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testParameterizedResolvedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest) Time elapsed: 0.004 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testSimpleEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest) Time elapsed: 0.003 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetAnnotatedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.002 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetBean(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.002 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetMember(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.002 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.009 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testIsTransient(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.001 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testSucessfulTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.priority.transactional.TransactionalPriorityObserverTest) Time elapsed: 0.022 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testFailedTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest) Time elapsed: 0.033 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testObserverFailedTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest) Time elapsed: 0.019 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testSucessfullTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest) Time elapsed: 0.035 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] afterSuccessObserverIsNotNotifiedAfterTxRollBack(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.roolback.TransactionalObserverRollbackTest) Time elapsed: 0.022 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] notifyAcceptingConsumerNotified(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.configurators.observerMethod.ObserverMethodConfiguratorTest) Time elapsed: 0 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.lifecycle.processInjectionPoint.ProcessInjectionPointFiredTest) Time elapsed: 0.167 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.lifecycle.processInjectionTarget.ContainerEventTest) Time elapsed: 0.164 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.lookup.modules.specialization.alternative.Specialization06Test) Time elapsed: 0.002 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] Tests run: 1571, Failures: 17, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 940.413 s <<< FAILURE! - in TestSuite [ERROR] testEventsFired(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.timeout.RequestScopeEventTimeoutTest) Time elapsed: 10.046 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] resolutionWithRepeatableQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.definition.qualifier.repeatable.RepeatableQualifiersTest) Time elapsed: 0.185 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testParameterizedResolvedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest) Time elapsed: 0.177 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testSimpleEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest) Time elapsed: 0.022 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetAnnotatedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.174 s <<< FAILURE! [ERROR] testGetBean(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest) Time elapsed: 0.021 s <<<
Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2
Hello, +1 : ) -- *Daniel Dias dos Santos* Java Developer SouJava & JCP Member GitHub: https://github.com/Daniel-Dos Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/danieldiasjava Twitter: http://twitter.com/danieldiasjava Em qua., 22 de jul. de 2020 às 14:17, Jean-Louis Monteiro < jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> escreveu: > I'll try to run the TCK tonight > > -- > Jean-Louis Monteiro > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 5:58 PM Zowalla, Richard < > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > tested it with my (EAR) applications (primarily web services, JSF) on > > Linux with OpenJDK 11. > > > > +1 (8.0.4) > > > > Best, > > Richard > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 22.07.2020, 15:34 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache > > > TomEE > > > 8.0.4. > > > > > > > > > Maven Repo: > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/ > > > > > > Binaries & Source: > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/ > > > > > > Source code: > > > TomEE 8.0.4: > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip > > > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2: > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip > > > > > > Tags: > > > > > > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4 > > > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2 > > > > > > Release notes: > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414 > > > > > > Please VOTE: > > > > > > [+1] Yes, release it > > > [+0] Not fussed > > > [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the > > > showstopper is) > > > > > > Vote will be open for 72 hours. > > > > > > Here is my +1. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Jon > > >
Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2
I'll try to run the TCK tonight -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 5:58 PM Zowalla, Richard < richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > Hi, > > tested it with my (EAR) applications (primarily web services, JSF) on > Linux with OpenJDK 11. > > +1 (8.0.4) > > Best, > Richard > > Am Mittwoch, den 22.07.2020, 15:34 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore: > > Hi All, > > > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache > > TomEE > > 8.0.4. > > > > > > Maven Repo: > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/ > > > > Binaries & Source: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/ > > > > Source code: > > TomEE 8.0.4: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip > > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip > > > > Tags: > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4 > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2 > > > > Release notes: > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414 > > > > Please VOTE: > > > > [+1] Yes, release it > > [+0] Not fussed > > [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the > > showstopper is) > > > > Vote will be open for 72 hours. > > > > Here is my +1. > > > > Thanks > > > > Jon >
Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2
Hi, tested it with my (EAR) applications (primarily web services, JSF) on Linux with OpenJDK 11. +1 (8.0.4) Best, Richard Am Mittwoch, den 22.07.2020, 15:34 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore: > Hi All, > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache > TomEE > 8.0.4. > > > Maven Repo: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/ > > Binaries & Source: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/ > > Source code: > TomEE 8.0.4: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip > > Tags: > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4 > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2 > > Release notes: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414 > > Please VOTE: > > [+1] Yes, release it > [+0] Not fussed > [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the > showstopper is) > > Vote will be open for 72 hours. > > Here is my +1. > > Thanks > > Jon
Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2
+1 thank you!. El mié., 22 jul. 2020 a las 9:24, Vicente Rossello () escribió: > +1 for tomee 8.0.4 Tested in our project > > I can't vote 9.0.0-M2 since I haven't tested it. > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:57 PM Jonathan Gallimore < > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache > TomEE > > 8.0.4. > > > > > > Maven Repo: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/ > > > > Binaries & Source: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/ > > > > Source code: > > TomEE 8.0.4: > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip > > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2: > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip > > > > Tags: > > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4 > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2 > > > > Release notes: > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414 > > > > Please VOTE: > > > > [+1] Yes, release it > > [+0] Not fussed > > [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the > > showstopper is) > > > > Vote will be open for 72 hours. > > > > Here is my +1. > > > > Thanks > > > > Jon > > > -- Atentamente: César Hernández.
Re: [VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2
+1 for tomee 8.0.4 Tested in our project I can't vote 9.0.0-M2 since I haven't tested it. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:57 PM Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache TomEE > 8.0.4. > > > Maven Repo: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/ > > Binaries & Source: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/ > > Source code: > TomEE 8.0.4: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip > TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip > > Tags: > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4 > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2 > > Release notes: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414 > > Please VOTE: > > [+1] Yes, release it > [+0] Not fussed > [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the > showstopper is) > > Vote will be open for 72 hours. > > Here is my +1. > > Thanks > > Jon >
[VOTE] Release TomEE 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2
Hi All, I am delighted to present a vote for Apache TomEE 9.0.0-M2 and Apache TomEE 8.0.4. Maven Repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetomee-1173/ Binaries & Source: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/ Source code: TomEE 8.0.4: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/tomee-project-8.0.4-source-release.zip TomEE Jakarta Conversion for 9.0.0-M2: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomee/staging-1173/tomee-8.0.4/apache-tomee-9.0.0-M2-source-release.zip Tags: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-project-8.0.4 https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-jakarta.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/tomee-9.0.0-M2 Release notes: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12312320=12348414 Please VOTE: [+1] Yes, release it [+0] Not fussed [-1] Don't release, there's a showstopper (please specify what the showstopper is) Vote will be open for 72 hours. Here is my +1. Thanks Jon
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello closed pull request #692: TOMEE-2809: Update to OWB 2.01.6
cocorossello closed pull request #692: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/692 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: Release heads-up
These all relate to: extension class org.apache.tomee.security.cdi.TomEESecurityExtension not registered, which relates to the new security module. I'll remove that for the release, and then put it straight back to continue work. Jon On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:24 AM Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > I currently have a handful of JAX-RS failures in the Arquillian test suite: > > [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: > 0.437 s <<< FAILURE! - in > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.apppath.AnnotatedApplicationTest > [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: > 0.136 s <<< FAILURE! - in > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.servlets.RestWithServletsTest > [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: > 1.605 s <<< FAILURE! - in > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.client.DefaultClientTest > [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: > 0.27 s <<< FAILURE! - in > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.listed.ListedApplicationTest > [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: > 0.115 s <<< FAILURE! - in > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.httpheaders.JAXRSHttpHeadersTest > [INFO] TomEE :: Arquillian Adaptors Parent :: Tests :: JAXRS FAILURE > [02:29 min] > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE > > Just digging into these, and then I'll be kicking off the release. > > Jon > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:23 AM Jonathan Gallimore < > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We've had some updated dependencies, some fixes around MDB instance >> limits, and a couple of other bugs fixes. We're also starting to get into a >> slight better momentum with regular releases. >> >> So - I'm going to roll an 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2 release now, and I'll >> follow up with releases for the two 7.x branches as well. >> >> If there's a showstopper, please let me know. >> >> Thanks >> >> Jon >> >
Re: Release heads-up
I currently have a handful of JAX-RS failures in the Arquillian test suite: [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.437 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.apppath.AnnotatedApplicationTest [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.136 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.servlets.RestWithServletsTest [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 1.605 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.client.DefaultClientTest [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.27 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.listed.ListedApplicationTest [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.115 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.jaxrs.httpheaders.JAXRSHttpHeadersTest [INFO] TomEE :: Arquillian Adaptors Parent :: Tests :: JAXRS FAILURE [02:29 min] [INFO] BUILD FAILURE Just digging into these, and then I'll be kicking off the release. Jon On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:23 AM Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > We've had some updated dependencies, some fixes around MDB instance > limits, and a couple of other bugs fixes. We're also starting to get into a > slight better momentum with regular releases. > > So - I'm going to roll an 8.0.4 and 9.0.0-M2 release now, and I'll > follow up with releases for the two 7.x branches as well. > > If there's a showstopper, please let me know. > > Thanks > > Jon >
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello opened a new pull request #693: Owb2.0.17
cocorossello opened a new pull request #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693 Another PR to upgrqade directly to OWB 2.0.17 (the explicit dependency on xbean-asm-util is not needed now) This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on a change in pull request #692: TOMEE-2809: Update to OWB 2.01.6
cocorossello commented on a change in pull request #692: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/692#discussion_r458615428 ## File path: pom.xml ## @@ -115,15 +115,15 @@ 1.9.0-alpha-2 3.1.0 -2.0.12 +2.0.15 Review comment: Sorry, this should be 2.0.16, I will push this now This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on a change in pull request #692: TOMEE-2809: Update to OWB 2.01.6
cocorossello commented on a change in pull request #692: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/692#discussion_r458614109 ## File path: pom.xml ## @@ -115,15 +115,15 @@ 1.9.0-alpha-2 3.1.0 -2.0.12 +2.0.15 Review comment: I thought it would be easier to do it in two steps (at least for me), since 2.0.17 comes with the asm8 change. I was planning to do it once this one is finished This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau commented on a change in pull request #692: TOMEE-2809: Update to OWB 2.01.6
rmannibucau commented on a change in pull request #692: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/692#discussion_r458609777 ## File path: pom.xml ## @@ -115,15 +115,15 @@ 1.9.0-alpha-2 3.1.0 -2.0.12 +2.0.15 Review comment: ticket mentions 2.0.16 and last release is 2.0.17 so maybe directly go to 2.0.17? This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
