[VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Hi all, Here is hopefully the last milestone release of the 4.2. Release notes: https://github.com/apache/cayenne/blob/4.2.M3/RELEASE-NOTES.txt Maven repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecayenne-1044/ Assemblies: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cayenne/4.2.M3/

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

+1 1) verified signatures 2) verified archives are basically identical between platforms 3) RAT indicates no unlicensed files 4) compiled from source 5) unit tests ran successfully 6) macOS specific and Platform-agnostic modelers launch on macOS On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 9:41 AM Nikita Timofeev wr

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

+1 Lots of fixes that address problems throughout my apps and downstream frameworks. E.g. I was able to remove a bunch of hacks from Agrest with this upgrade. Great job! Andrus > On Mar 13, 2021, at 6:41 PM, Nikita Timofeev > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Here is hopefully the last milestone re

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Are the tabs in CM on macOS supposed to look this way? [image: Screen Shot 2021-03-18 at 6.27.48 AM.png] On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 2:57 AM Andrus Adamchik wrote: > +1 > > Lots of fixes that address problems throughout my apps and downstream > frameworks. E.g. I was able to remove a bunch of hack

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Also the ObjEntity Callbacks tab view: [image: Screen Shot 2021-03-18 at 6.30.49 AM.png] On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 6:29 AM Michael Gentry wrote: > Are the tabs in CM on macOS supposed to look this way? > > [image: Screen Shot 2021-03-18 at 6.27.48 AM.png] > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 2:57 AM An

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Hi Mike, Looks like the list strips off the attachments. Andrus > On Mar 18, 2021, at 6:31 AM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > Also the ObjEntity Callbacks tab view: > > > > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 6:29 AM Michael Gentry > wrote: > Are the tabs in CM on macOS suppo

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Images here: https://imgur.com/a/ET6yWHb FWIW, I have OpenJDKs 8-15 installed and it launched in 15. On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 6:37 AM Andrus Adamchik wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Looks like the list strips off the attachments. > > Andrus > > > On Mar 18, 2021, at 6:31 AM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Yep, same on mine. Wacky... I am still +1, but would be great to address these at some point. > On Mar 18, 2021, at 6:43 AM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > Images here: https://imgur.com/a/ET6yWHb > > FWIW, I have OpenJDKs 8-15 installed and it launched in 15. > > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 6:37 A

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

What are the expected build scenarios? With Java 8 and 11, everything built successfully. With Java 14, it errors out at the documentation: [INFO] tutorial-rop-server-http2: Cayenne ROP HTTP/2 Server Tutorial SUCCESS [ 0.297 s] [INFO] cayenne-docs-parent: Cayenne Documentation Parent .. SUCCESS [

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

I suppose the important scenario is the lowest JDK version (i.e. 8), as it produces forward-compatible binaries. Andrus > On Mar 18, 2021, at 2:43 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > What are the expected build scenarios? With Java 8 and 11, everything built > successfully. With Java 14, it errors

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

* Checksums valid. * Signatures valid. * RAT valid. * DMG mounts. * Cayenne Modeller (only tested macOS version) runs [1,2]. * Release builds [3]. +1 overall. I'd add a release/announcement note for the UI glitches. Thanks! mrg 1: There are a few UI glitches (https://imgur.com/a/ET6yWHb), at l

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

With my +1 the result is following: John Huss (PMC): +1 Andrus Adamchik (PMC): +1 Michael Gentry (PMC): +1 Nikita Timofeev (PMC): +1 I will finish the release today. Thanks, everyone! P.S. Here are issues that Michael have found: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAY-2702 (callbacks menu, al

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Awesome! Thanks Nikita! On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 10:21 AM Nikita Timofeev wrote: > With my +1 the result is following: > > John Huss (PMC): +1 > Andrus Adamchik (PMC): +1 > Michael Gentry (PMC): +1 > Nikita Timofeev (PMC): +1 > > I will finish the release today. > Thanks, everyone! > > P.S. Here

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

I can see the artifacts are already on Maven Central. I will work on the announcement. Andrus > On Mar 19, 2021, at 6:00 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > Awesome! Thanks Nikita! > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 10:21 AM Nikita Timofeev > wrote: > >> With my +1 the result is following: >> >> Jo

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Hi, I'm not part of your PMC, and there may be a reason(s) for this that I'm unaware of, but I noticed a couple of unusual things in your release: 1. The LICENSE includes the Eclipse Public License. The EPL license is Category B and in general you can't include anything that licensed Category B

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Hi Justin, Thanks for catching these issues. I think #2 is simply a bug in the build script ("cayenne-gradle-plugin/build" is in ".gitignore" and is clearly copied to the distro by mistake). Need to fix it. #1 is something I have no recollection of... EPL is indeed included in LICENSE.txt, but

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Hi, Having a dependancy on something that EPL is 100% OK, but if it is only a dependancy you then don’t need to list it in your LICENSE file. [1] Only things that are in the source release artefact need to be mentioned in LICENSE. Kind Regards, Justin 1. https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howt

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Interesting. Being Apache old-timers, we haven't reviewed the LICENSE/NOTICE requirements in a bit. So looks like we may need 2 separate LICENSE files for source and binary distros: 1. The source one should exclude the following licenses: CAUCHO, JGOODIES, OGNL, VPP, jEdit Syntax, Inflector (di

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

Hi, > Interesting. Being Apache old-timers, we haven't reviewed the LICENSE/NOTICE > requirements in a bit. So looks like we may need 2 separate LICENSE files for > source and binary distros That is how a lot of projects handle it yes. > I don't see anything about including LICENSE/NOTICE in .

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 4.2.M3 release

> On Jun 9, 2021, at 12:53 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > >> >> I don't see anything about including LICENSE/NOTICE in .jar files anymore >> (we do include them). > > Yep that still needed last I looked. Makes sense. Also since the rule is "license must match what's in the artifact", we shoul