Re: [VOTE] Apache XBean 4.25 release

+1 txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 15.04.2024 um 13:34 schrieb fpapon : > > Hi everyone, > > I submit Apache XBean 4.25 release to your vote. > > This release mainly includes (other issue description is available on > the release note): > > * Bug > - [XBEAN-343] - consistent handling of

Re: Arthur release

all fine, go on! txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 05.04.2024 um 09:30 schrieb Francois Papon : > > Hi all, > > I would like to start the release process for Arthur, any objection? > > regards, > > François >

Status BatchEE-2.0.0

Hi folks! I've now finished the work on BatchEE-2.0.0. I think we have to enable the TCK still, but all our internal tests do work again. Note that I had to move back to an old Camel version due to getting test errors with a newer version. Would be great if someone could please take a look at

Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] Release Apache Geronimo BatchEE-1.0.3

Hi! And here comes my own +1 That makes it: +1: Romain, Francois, Jean-Louis, Mark No -1 nor 0 I'll go on to publish the repo etc. LieGrue, strub > Am 18.04.2023 um 12:26 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > Hi! > > I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing BatchEE-1.0.3. >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo BatchEE-1.0.3

n.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > Le mar. 18 avr. 2023 à 12:27, Mark Struberg via dev <mailto:dev@geronimo.apache.org>> a écrit : >> Hi! >> >> I'd lik

[VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo BatchEE-1.0.3

Hi! I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing BatchEE-1.0.3. This is mostly an update to the latest TomEE version and a fix in the ChildFirstURLClassLoader [BATCHEE-162 ] - improve reproducible builds [BATCHEE-167

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Arthur 1.0.6

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 17.04.2023 um 20:54 schrieb fpapon : > > Hi, > > This is a call to vote in favor of releasing Apache Geronimo Arthur version > 1.0.6. > > We solved 7 issues: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10220=12351343 > > ** Bug > *

Re: [batchee] future?

anager, batchEE, etc). So they need a home. Of course we can >> split them apart and give them to different projects, but it does not solve >> any problem. The people are the same. As soon as we allow all projects to >> contribute or even become committers here, I don't see any issue

Re: [CDI40] how to tackle the jakarta 10 APIs?

far as I've looked through a bunch of spec api jars. LieGrue, strub > Am 23.11.2022 um 11:02 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > > > > Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:58, Mark Struberg via dev <mailto:dev@geronimo.apache.org>> a écrit : >> As written over at the

Re: [CDI40] how to tackle the jakarta 10 APIs?

/> | 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. 22 nov

Re: [batchee] future?

ent, just making it living (updating versions and spec impl). >> >> Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 23:31, Mark Struberg via dev > <mailto:dev@geronimo.apache.org>> a écrit : >>> I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing >>> time on a

[CDI40] how to tackle the jakarta 10 APIs?

Hi! How do we want to approach the CDI-4.0 api? I don't want to just use the official API as it is bloated with the 'CDI light' stuff. So there is good reason to just keep our own version - even if it is just a shaded/spit of the official one. What about the others? Do we still want to roll

Re: [batchee] future?

I still use batchee very much. So I'd keep it well alive. Also investing time on and on. Is there anything which is required to do? LieGrue, strub > Am 18.11.2022 um 09:50 schrieb Francois Papon : > > Hi, > > I don't have insights about how BatchEE is used today and how the jbatch >

Re: [VOTE] geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec 1.0.1

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 07.10.2021 um 21:30 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO : > > Hi! > > I’d like to call a VOTE on the geronimo-javamail_1.6_spec 1.0.1 > > Here is the staging repo > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1141 >

Fwd: OpenJPA 3.2.0 with Java 16

Hiho! Sorry for x-posting, but this is really something we need to fix in geronimo-specs. Gonna roll the changes and perform a release if there is no objection. LieGrue, strub > Anfang der weitergeleiteten Nachricht: > > Von: Mark Struberg > Betreff: Aw: OpenJPA 3.2.0 with Jav

Re: [VOTE] - Move Svn to Gitbox

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 15.05.2021 um 08:25 schrieb fpa...@apache.org: > > Hi, > > I would like to start a vote about moving some projects from svn to gitbox: > > - http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/ > > > -

Re: [DISCUSS] - SVN to Gitbox

.net>> a écrit : >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> I guess you mean for the release ? >>> >>> If we agree to have bunch of tag, we can have spec in a single repo (it’s >>> what I’m doing at ServiceMix). >>> >>> But I guess it would be clea

Re: [DISCUSS] - SVN to Gitbox

specs could be tricky. We'd need to do every single spec as own git repo, isn't? LieGrue, strub > Am 11.05.2021 um 05:39 schrieb fpa...@apache.org: > > Hi, > > I would like to start a discussion about moving some of our project > repositories from svn to gitbox. > > > I think we can start

Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] Release Apache BatchEE 1.0.0

Hi! The VOTE did succeed with +1: JBO, Romain, Ray, Francois, Mark, Reinhard, Cesar no -1 nor 0 txs 2 all who reviewed and voted! Gonna go on with the release. LieGrue, strub > Am 08.05.2021 um 09:51 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > hi lords and ladies! > > I want to call a VO

Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache xBean-4.20

.@apache.org> > > Le 07/05/2021 à 10:22, Mark Struberg a écrit : >> hiho! >> >> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing xbean-4.20. >> >> The only change is to switch back to a dependency-reduced pom. >> 4.18 und 4.19 did leak the shaded ASM dependencie

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache BatchEE 1.0.0

My own +1 LieGrue, strub > Am 08.05.2021 um 09:51 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > hi lords and ladies! > > I want to call a VOTE on releasing Apache BatchEE 1.0.0 > This is mainly an update to JavaEE8 and a few bug fixes. > > We fixed the following tickets. > >

[VOTE] Release Apache BatchEE 1.0.0

hi lords and ladies! I want to call a VOTE on releasing Apache BatchEE 1.0.0 This is mainly an update to JavaEE8 and a few bug fixes. We fixed the following tickets. Bug [BATCHEE-126 ] - upgrade to tomee-8.0.6 [BATCHEE-149

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache xBean-4.20

my own +1 LieGrue, strub > Am 07.05.2021 um 10:22 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > hiho! > > I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing xbean-4.20. > > The only change is to switch back to a dependency-reduced pom. > 4.18 und 4.19 did leak the shaded ASM dependencies down to co

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache xBean-4.20

ww.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > Le ven. 7 mai 2021 à 11:35, Mark Struberg <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>> a écrit : > That's the reason I also added it to svn:ignore. > That way it doesn't pollute our repo at least. > > Happy to go

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache xBean-4.20

t; | 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 ven. 7 mai 2021 à 10:27, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net

[VOTE] Release Apache xBean-4.20

hiho! I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing xbean-4.20. The only change is to switch back to a dependency-reduced pom. 4.18 und 4.19 did leak the shaded ASM dependencies down to consumers. This defeats the shading. Downstream projects can of course use exclude lists, but since the artifactId

Re: BATCHEE release?

, Mark Struberg a écrit : > hi folks! > > I'd like to do a BATCHEE release soon. > Anything you want to work on then ping me. > > txs and LieGrue, > strub >

BATCHEE release?

hi folks! I'd like to do a BATCHEE release soon. Anything you want to work on then ping me. txs and LieGrue, strub

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Arthur 1.0.2

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 11.02.2021 um 12:16 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Hi all, > > I'd like to release Arthur 1.0.2 as mentionned on the list. > It is only about ensuring our maven plugin resolves knights properly: > > GERONIMO-6803

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo BatchEE 0.6

c locking > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BATCHEE-108> Unassigned OPEN > BATCHEE-126 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BATCHEE-126> > upgrade to tomee-7.0.4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BATCHEE-126> > Mark Stru

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo JWT Auth 1.0.4

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 11.11.2020 um 21:53 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Hi everyone, > > Here is the vote for our JWT Auth implementation v 1.0.4. > > The issues are: > > GERONIMO-6757 Changes to > make geronimo-jwt-auth work with

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Simple JCache 1.0.5

+1 LieGrue,strub On Tuesday, 10 November 2020, 18:29:23 CET, Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote: +1 (binding) ThanksRegardsJB Le 10 nov. 2020 à 18:10, Francois Papon a écrit : +1 (non-binding) thanks! regards, François fpa...@apache.org Le 10/11/2020 à 15:36, Romain Manni-Bucau a

Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] Release geronimo-openapi-1.0.13

Hi! The VOTE did pass with the following: +1: Ray, Romain, Francois, Daniel, Jean-Baptiste, Jean-Louis, Mark No -1 nor 0 txs for voting and LieGrue, strub > Am 16.10.2020 um 15:20 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > > > Hi! > > Here is the staging repo > https://repos

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

hi! The VOTE did pass with the following: +1 Ray, Daniel, JBO, Romain, Francois, Mark No -1 nor 0 txs to all who voted! I'll gonna publish the artifacts. LieGrue, strub > Am 15.10.2020 um 22:38 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > Hi! > > I want to call a VOTE on releasing &

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

hi! The VOTE did pass with the following: +1 Ray, Romain, Daniel, JBO, Francois, Mark No -1 nor 0 txs to all who voted! I'll gonna publish the artifacts. LieGrue, strub > Am 15.10.2020 um 19:40 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > Hi! > > I want to call a VOTE on releasing > ger

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

hi! The VOTE did pass with the following: +1 Ray, Romain, Daniel, JBO, Francois, Mark No -1 nor 0 txs to all who voted! I'll gonna publish the artifacts. LieGrue, strub > Am 15.10.2020 um 19:37 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > Hi! > > I want to call a VOTE on releasing > ger

[VOTE] Release geronimo-openapi-1.0.13

Hi! Here is the staging repo https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1132/ source jars can be found at

Re: jira ticket mess

; What about generalizing use of fix version containing the "target" project > (and we do for openapi or metrics) ? > > I think both component + fix version would be enough to clearly identify > release content/release notes. > > Regards > JB > > > > Le 16 oc

jira ticket mess

hi folks! Geronimo is an umbrella project. We have tons of tickets, but we actually cannot make much sense of it tracking wise as the versions in JIRA is per project and not per module. That means if we do a release, we do not really have a clean track about what actually got fixed, right?

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

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

[jira] [Resolved] (GERONIMO-6784) ClassCastException in javax.enterprise.util.AnnotationLiteral#hashCode

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Mark Struberg resolved GERONIMO-6784. - Resolution: Fixed Thank you Arne, applied and release is under vote

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

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

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

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

[DISCUSS] release a few specs

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

[jira] [Assigned] (GERONIMO-6784) ClassCastException in javax.enterprise.util.AnnotationLiteral#hashCode

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Mark Struberg reassigned GERONIMO-6784: --- Assignee: Mark Struberg > ClassCastExcept

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

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 13.10.2020 um 16:59 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO : > > 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 >

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

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 13.10.2020 um 17:04 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO : > > 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 >

[DISCUSS] release g-openapi?

hi folks! Got asked for a geronimo-openapi release. There seems to be a nasty encoding issue which already got fixed it seems https://github.com/apache/geronimo-openapi/commit/73e531169da27c6939eea5d944e0bf04c5173190

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo XBean 4.18

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 21.09.2020 um 08:21 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Hi everyone, > > Here is the vote for xbean 4.18 which provides asm9 shade. > > Here is the tag: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-4.18/ >

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

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 15.09.2020 um 14:31 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 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

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

will finally change artifact coordinates! LieGrue, strub > Am 28.04.2020 um 19:28 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > > > Le mar. 28 avr. 2020 à 18:25, Mark Struberg <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>> a écrit : > As explained in the other thread: > > What is the dif

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

As explained in the other thread: What is the difference between the various specs and their previous versions? Afaict the only difference is jakartaEE, and we WILL NOT MANAGE to do all via simple replacement. This is an absolute dead end. There have been plenty of smallish methods removed in

Re: Jakarta artifacts?

/www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > Le mar. 28 avr. 2020 à 10:30, Mark Struberg <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>> a écrit : > We also have a branch for jakartaee already. > > The qu

Re: Jakarta artifacts?

We also have a branch for jakartaee already. The question is which one is easier. There are btw slight differences. It is NOT 1:1! Some methods got removed! So I'd rather go the branch way. LieGrue, strub > Am 28.04.2020 um 07:37 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Hi everyone, > > Should we

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geronimo XBean 4.17

+1LieGrue,strubAm 27.04.2020 um 16:47 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau :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: 

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

Hi folks! 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

Re: Thinking to release geronimo-config-1.2.3

no, go on! Anything missing? LieGrue, strub > Am 12.04.2020 um 21:23 schrieb Raymond Auge : > > This would be 1.2.3 with support for MP-Config 1.4 final. > > Any objections? > -- > Raymond Augé (@rotty3000) > Senior Software Architect

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

and mine as well +1 LieGrue, strub > Am 13.04.2020 um 17:22 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 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: >

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

2020 à 11:09, Jean-Baptiste Onofre > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> a écrit : >> +1 (non binding) >> >> Regards >> JB >> >>> Le 14 mars 2020 à 08:53, Mark Struberg >> <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>> a écrit : >>> >>> Good morning

Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] release Apache Geronimo Genesis 2.4

Hi! The VOTE did pass with the following: +1: Romain, Raymond, Mark No -1 nor 0 txs and 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 on

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

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 <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> a écrit : > +1 (non binding) > > Regards > JB > >> Le 14 mars 2020 à 08:

Re: [VOTE] release Apache Geronimo Genesis 2.4

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-Nam

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

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

[VOTE] release Apache Geronimo Genesis 2.4

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.

Re: enhance genesis-flava8 to use Automatic-Module-Name ?

au> > | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > Le ven. 13 mars 2020 à 12:48, Mark Struberg <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>> a écrit : > Btw, anyone has a clue what

Re: enhance genesis-flava8 to use Automatic-Module-Name ?

Btw, anyone has a clue what the module name for the cdi-2.0 api is? Did not find anything in the published official jar... Am I just blind? LieGrue, strub > Am 13.03.2020 um 12:31 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > I'd leave genesis-flava for now. We can get rid of it for jakarta.* maybe.

Re: enhance genesis-flava8 to use Automatic-Module-Name ?

completely > 2. Module info is a pain but still the only way to be jlink compatible, > automatic name just enables compilation > > I'd be to have a classified artifact with module info if we can otherwise > automatic name is ok. > > Le ven. 13 mars 2020 à 11:26, Mark Struberg

enhance genesis-flava8 to use Automatic-Module-Name ?

hi! I think half-loud about enhancing flava8 to use the maven-jar plugin to automatically provide a module name. It defaults to the artifact-id but can be tweaked by each module to include a Automatic-Module-Name: entry in manifest.mf. The reason why I do not like the module-info.class is that

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JCache Simple 1.0.4

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 17.02.2020 um 10:35 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Hi everyone, > > As mentionned on the list, here is the vote for our jcache implementation > fixing OSGi-CDI metadata. > > Here is the staging repo: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JCache Simple 1.0.3

evelopment/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > Le dim. 16 f?vr. 2020 ? 02:06, Cesar Hernandez <mailto:cesargu...@gmail.com>> a ?crit : > +1 > > El s?b., 15 feb. 2020 a las 14:31, Mark Struberg ( <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>>) escribi?: > +1 > > LieGrue, >

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo JCache Simple 1.0.3

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 14.02.2020 um 09:22 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 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: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache XBean 4.16

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 31.01.2020 um 16:41 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 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): >

Re: [XBean] 4.16 coming?

no, go for it! txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 29.01.2020 um 09:27 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 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

Re: GERONIMO-6759 - Support for MicroProfile Config 1.4

lgtm, Thanks Daniel and also Romain! LieGrue, strub > Am 26.01.2020 um 16:22 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > FYI I just fixed master code - test was using the proxy fields instead of > injected values. Feel free to review and enhance if needed. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau | Blog

Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] release Apache geronimo-openapi 1.0.12

019 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/r

Re: [VOTE] release Apache geronimo-openapi 1.0.12

Of course my own +1 LieGrue, strub > Am 11.12.2019 um 20:18 schrieb 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: >

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

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

[VOTE] release Apache geronimo-openapi 1.0.12

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:

[DISCUSS] kickstart a release of geronimo-openapi?

hi folks! we got some patches for openapi. Would run a release in the afternoon. Any objections? txs and LieGrue, strub

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo Arthur 1.0.0

+1 txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 05.12.2019 um 09:48 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 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).

Re: Transfer/retirement of BatchEE

Indeed, +1 for transferring to / graduating under Apache Geronimo! txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 19.11.2019 um 21:46 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Oki, > > Seems name, IP, grant etc is moving from asf to asf we are good. > Since batchee pmc agreed on a report thread I guess we just need a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache XBean 4.15

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 24.10.2019 um 21:41 schrieb 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, > > François > > fpa...@apache.org

Re: [VOTE] geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 09.09.2019 um 17:47 schrieb Jean-Louis MONTEIRO : > > > Hi! > > I’d like to call a VOTE on the geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec > > There is only one ticket for this release > ** GERONIMO-6745 ensure accumulate logic works in jsonbconfig > > Here is the staging repo >

Re: DISCUSS geronimo-security_1.0_spec content unclear

Yes, that's a sane approach. EPL just requires us to have it mentioned in every downstream NOTICE iiuc. From the EPL v2 [1] 3.1 If a Contributor Distributes the Program in any form, then: • a) the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2,

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

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 03.09.2019 um 19:49 schrieb Cesar Hernandez : > > +1 > > El mar., 3 sept. 2019 a las 11:43, Romain Manni-Bucau > () escribió: > +1 > > Le mar. 3 sept. 2019 à 19:29, Raymond Auge a écrit > : > +1 > > - Ray > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 11:25 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >

[metrics] switching SecurityValidator?

hi folks! Right now the SecurityValidator in metrics cannot be switched easily, right? Wouldn't it be better to simply inject it? Or at least have a protected method getSecurityValidator() ? LieGrue, strub

Re: DISCUSS geronimo-security_1.0_spec content unclear

ww.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > > Le mer. 4 sept. 2019 à 15:04, Mark Struberg a écrit : > >> No, this is an intended situation. >> When one fully passes the TCK then you get the EFSL. This 'removes' the >> copyleft nature of

Re: DISCUSS geronimo-security_1.0_spec content unclear

e API and use microprofile jars. > > > > It's the same license and we are using them in our MicroProfile > > implementations. > > -- > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > &

Re: DISCUSS geronimo-security_1.0_spec content unclear

depends what their license is. EPL is (weak) copyleft. Thus I would like to avoid exposing it downstream as api. LieGrue, strub > Am 03.09.2019 um 16:20 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > If we still can't reuse jakata artifacts (their license is ok and there is > no impl reference inside so we

Re: DISCUSS Release for Geronimo Annotations 1.3

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 03.09.2019 um 09:45 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > +1 > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book > > > Le mar. 3 sept. 2019 à 09:44, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO a > écrit : > Everything is green now > > > am I ok to run the

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.11

+1 LieGrue, strub Am Mittwoch, den 21.08.2019, 10:21 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau: > 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

Re: Releasing openapi soon?

sure, go on! LieGrue, strub Am Montag, den 19.08.2019, 09:44 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau: > Hi everyone, > I recently fixed some JSON-B mapping in our Microprofile openapi impl. > > If there is no objection, I'd like to release it soon but it can need some > testing from your part if you

Re: mail tck?

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 10.08.2019 um 10:25 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré : > > Hi Romain, > > I didn't notice that but I think you are right about the location. I > think it's worth to try to pass TCK. > > Regards > JB > > On 10/08/2019 10:23, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >>

Re: TomEE 8 / Jakarta EE 8 / JavaMail 1.5

thanks JL! LieGrue, strub > Am 01.08.2019 um 14:42 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro : > > Hey TomEE and Geronimo folks, > > I built and deployed 1.5 SNAPSHOT of JavaMail API and provider. > I also did the integration in TomEE with the snapshots. > > I am currently running Jakarta EE TCK to see

Re: Status of geronimo-javamail_1.5_spec

+1 LieGrue, strub > Am 30.07.2019 um 13:14 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Hi JL > > Was thinking the same,some api used by new libs like greenmail utilities are > missing in our last bundle so we should definitively catch up. > > +1 to skip beta/milestone stage, always had been considered

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geronimo OpenAPI 1.0.9

+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 >

[jira] [Commented] (GERONIMO-6726) Create jakarta.* spec APIs

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6726?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16837650#comment-16837650 ] Mark Struberg commented on GERONIMO-6726: - Hi [~downdrown]! It is pretty much 100% fix

Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis

>> Le dim. 5 mai 2019 à 20:49, Mark Struberg a écrit : >> Of course there will be no releases until the EF has a common understanding >> how to proceed on their side. After all the main goal is compatibility >> amongst vendors. >> >> I'd actually

Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis

rongly think we dont need a strong toggle and that future > compat can rely on javax, this is what javaee was about after all. > > But no issue testing things, we can even use sandbox/ for that. > >> Le dim. 5 mai 2019 à 20:49, Mark Struberg a écrit : >> Of course the

Re: [DISCUSS] implement jakarta spec apis

, what the limits are and what other options we have. LieGrue, strub > Am 05.05.2019 um 19:35 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Ok. > > Can we agree to take this discussion back and hold any release - no issue > with snaps - until it is clarified? > > Le dim. 5 mai 201

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >