[weld-dev] Maven Archetype Bill of Materials - How should we handle minor variations in point releases of Java EE 6 containers?

[Dan Allen]

Great initiative! This is a real win for JBoss, especially given the debacle
of the aggregate jar that Sun published to the java.net repository.

It seems that several core specs are missing, such as bean validation, CDI
and JSF. I'm I just not seeing them or are they missing for a reason? Also,
are we planning on doing profile stack poms such as the web profile?

Again, nice start.

-Dan

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Shelly McGowan <smcgowan at redhat.com>wrote:

>
> Pete,
>
> This morning I released the jboss-javaee_6.0_spec, 1.0.0.Beta3.
>
>
> http://repository.jboss.org/maven2/org/jboss/spec/jboss-javaee_6.0_spec/1.0.0.Beta3
>
>
> This release contains fix for JBEE-33 - update to use JACC 1.4.
>
>
> Shelly McGowan
> JBoss, by Red Hat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pete Muir" <pmuir at redhat.com>
> To: "Steven Boscarine" <steven.boscarine at childrens.harvard.edu>
> Cc: "Weld-Dev List" <weld-dev at lists.jboss.org>, smcgowan at redhat.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 8:00:35 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Maven Archetype Bill of Materials - How should we
> handle minor variations in point releases of Java EE 6 containers?
>
> Shelly has pointed us at
> http://repository.jboss.org/maven2//org/jboss/spec/jboss-javaee_6.0_spec/1.0.0.Beta2/jboss-javaee_6.0_spec-1.0.0.Beta2.pomwhich works great as a jboss-6.0.0-bom. Unfortunately, Sun control the javax
> namespace, and don't publish a BOM for Java EE, so producing one of these is
> much harder.
>
> I suggest we stick with the JBoss one for now, along with instructions on
> how to create one for other app servers.
>
> WDYT?
>
> On 12 Apr 2010, at 16:47, Steven Boscarine wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> > The Weld archetypes need to be updated to reflect the latest Weld 1.0.1
> > release.
> >
> > Presently, we're using the weld-extensions-bom
> >
> > <dependency>
> > <groupId>org.jboss.weld</groupId>
> > <artifactId>weld-extensions-bom</artifactId>
> > <version>1.0.0-CR2</version>
> > <type>pom</type>
> > <scope>import</scope>
> > </dependency>
> >
> > The immediate issue is that the archetypes need to reflect the changes.
> >
> > The hairier issue is dealing with minor point release differences
> >
> > Now there's 2 variants of weld in the wild, via 2 Java EE containers.
> > Glassfish has weld-1.0.0 and JBoss 6 will have 1.0.1.  Should this be
> > reflected via different BOMs?
> >
> > Should there be a weld-jboss-6.0.0-bom? glassfish-v3-bom?  Presumably,
> > down the road, there will be more variants as other APIs have minor
> > point increases.
> >
> > If not, does anyone have suggestions for dealing with trivial variations
> > in versions between container point releases?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steven
> > _______________________________________________
> > weld-dev mailing list
> > weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>



-- 
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597

http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/weld-dev/attachments/20100418/550297b7/attachment-0001.html