[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-4649) Upgrade JCache dependency when Apache 2.0 license migration finalized

Denis Magda created IGNITE-4649: --- Summary: Upgrade JCache dependency when Apache 2.0 license migration finalized Key: IGNITE-4649 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4649 Project: Ignite

Re: JCache dependency

Just checked and our spec jar passes sigtest. Not sure for this week but think we can run a vote next one if nobody objects - don't hesitate to ping if nothing happens ;). Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber 2016-03-30 9:20 GMT+02:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan

Re: JCache dependency

TCK does contain the sigtest: https://github.com/jsr107/jsr107tck/tree/master/sigtest Looking forward to getting the 1.0 version :) D. On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Le 30 mars 2016 01:45, "Dmitriy Setrakyan" a >

Re: JCache dependency

Le 30 mars 2016 01:45, "Dmitriy Setrakyan" a écrit : > > I just mention to mention that Apache Ignite passes JCache TCK with flying colors :) > True! Totally forgot tck were open! Didn't check sigtest, is it there too? If so nothing blocking a 1.0. > We have it integrated

Re: JCache dependency

I just mention to mention that Apache Ignite passes JCache TCK with flying colors :) We have it integrated into our build routine and verify it using our CI tests. In addition, it was verified by one of the JCache spec leads, Greg Luck, who confirmed that Ignite complies with the spec. Given the

Re: JCache dependency

ok, let me try to make it clearer (and don't hesitate to shout if still not ;)): TCK are not only @Test but also some bianary validations (aka sigtest or signature tests) the spec jars need to pass. It basically checks you respect the spec signature for the supported java version of the spec. Not

Re: JCache dependency

We will switch the Ignite JAR to the 1.0-alpha-1 version from Geronimo, but I am still very confused. I do not understand why we need to check any TCK compliance when creating a JAR for the JSR107 spec. The TCK compliance should be checked against an implementation, not a spec. Is there any

Re: JCache dependency

Le 28 mars 2016 10:15, "Dmitriy Setrakyan" a écrit : > > John, > > I am still a bit confused. I was talking about the version of the JCache spec API, essentially only interfaces. The spec does not have any implementation, nor implies that every project importing or

Re: JCache dependency

John, I am still a bit confused. I was talking about the version of the JCache spec API, essentially only interfaces. The spec does not have any implementation, nor implies that every project importing or depending on the spec must be compliant with the spec. In my view implementation and TCK

Re: JCache dependency

Romain, I am not sure what you mean by not having access to TCK. Are you talking about validating compatibility with JCAche using the TCK [1]? In this case, Apache Ignite does pass the TCK. Moreover, the TCK seems to be licensed under Apache 2.0 [2]. Can you please explain? [1]

Re: JCache dependency

Alpha cause asf doesnt have oracle tck so we cant validate binary compat but it targets jcache 1.0. More a legal thing than anything else. If you have access to tck and can validate the binaries we can move on 1.0 Le 27 mars 2016 00:21, "Dmitriy Setrakyan" a écrit : > Hi

Re: JCache dependency

Hi Romain, The only issue I see is the version. JSR107 spec is on version 1.0.0 [1], while the Geronimo JCache jar is on version 1.0-alpha-1. Any chance you can upgrade the version? [1] https://github.com/jsr107/jsr107spec/tree/v1.0.0 D. On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau

Re: JCache dependency

Hi Dmitriy, why not reusing geronimo jar? Generally @apache spec are owned by geronimo and reused as much as possible using geronimo as umbrella spec project. What's the issue you hit? Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber 2016-03-26 21:20 GMT+01:00 Dmitriy

Re: JCache dependency

Sorry, this is the JCache maven dependency I was referring to: http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.geronimo.specs/geronimo-jcache_1.0_spec On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > Hello Geronimo community! > > I have noticed that Geronimo