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

[Pete Muir]

On 19 Apr 2010, at 02:31, Dan Allen wrote:

> 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

Shelly is working on CDI at least.

> 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?

This would be nice.

> 
> 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.pom which 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
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev