juddi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release jUDDI-3.1.0
Date Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:29:14 GMT
The build now works for me.

I don't know what the .txt files are used for or how but I think it would be better to get
a license header into them if its plausible.

What is the .rpc file?  Is it generated?

thanks!
david jencks



On Jun 16, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Tom Cunningham wrote:

> Fixed the asm issue, and I've added headers to most of the files below.      The ones
I did not add anything were :
> 
> - the .txt files
> - the .rpc file
> - the .ser file, which is a serialized class file whose format that I guess rat doesn't
know about
> 
> I think we're okay on omitting it from those files.
> 
> The only one I'm unsure of is the .odp file - it is three powerpoint slides - we could
either add a license or just remove the file, I'll let Kurt make the call.
> 
> 
> On 06/15/2011 06:45 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>> done in rev 1136228.
>> Running maven rat:check on a fresh checkout I still see:
>> 
>>  !????? juddi-console/juddi-portal/package.properties
>>  !????? juddi-console/juddi-portal/pluto/unitpngfix.js
>>  !????? juddi-console/uddi-portlets/.gwt-tmp/shell/org.apache.juddi.portlets.Application.JUnit/422AEE328955081603763BA1867826A0.gwt.rpc
>>  !????? juddi-console/uddi-portlets/src/main/webapp/index.html
>>  !????? juddi-console/uddi-portlets/tomcat/conf/web.xml
>>  !????? juddi-console/uddi-portlets/tomcat/webapps/ROOT/WEB-INF/web.xml
>>  !????? juddi-console/uddi-portlets/tomcat/work/gwt/localhost/_/tldCache.ser
>>  !????? juddi-console/uddi-portlets/uddi-portlets.launch
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/companies.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/countries.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/emails.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/firstnames.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/lastnames.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/nouns.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/searchphrases.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/sentences.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/streets.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/towns.txt
>>  !????? qa/juddi-xlt/config/data/default/words.txt
>>  !????? qa/QATestingProcess.odp
>>  !????? RELEASE_NOTES.html
>> 
>> I'm also getting a new build error today that I didn't get yesterday that looks like
an asm version mismatch:
>> 
>>   <testcase time="0.028" classname="org.apache.juddi.rmi.JNDIRegistrationTest"
name="registerToJNDI_AnonymousPort">
>>     <error message="org.objectweb.asm.ClassVisitor.visit(ILjava/lang/String;Ljava/lang/String;[Ljava/lang/String;Ljava/lang/String;)V"
type="java.lang.NoSuchMethodError">java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: org.objectweb.asm.ClassVisitor.visit(ILjava/lang/String;Ljava/lang/String;[Ljava/lang/String;Ljava/lang/String;)V
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.ClassEmitter.begin_class(ClassEmitter.java:63)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.KeyFactory$Generator.generateClass(KeyFactory.java:173)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.DefaultGeneratorStrategy.generate(DefaultGeneratorStrategy.java:25)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.AbstractClassGenerator.create(AbstractClassGenerator.java:215)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.KeyFactory$Generator.create(KeyFactory.java:145)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.KeyFactory.create(KeyFactory.java:117)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.core.KeyFactory.create(KeyFactory.java:108)
>>         at net.sf.cglib.proxy.Enhancer.&lt;clinit&gt;(Enhancer.java:64)
>>         at org.mockejb.interceptor.InterceptableProxy.create(InterceptableProxy.java:38)
>>         at org.mockejb.jndi.MockContextFactory.getInitialContext(MockContextFactory.java:47)
>>         at javax.naming.spi.NamingManager.getInitialContext(NamingManager.java:667)
>>         at javax.naming.InitialContext.getDefaultInitCtx(InitialContext.java:288)
>>         at javax.naming.InitialContext.init(InitialContext.java:223)
>>         at javax.naming.InitialContext.&lt;init&gt;(InitialContext.java:175)
>>         at org.apache.juddi.rmi.JNDIRegistration.&lt;init&gt;(JNDIRegistration.java:60)
>>         at org.apache.juddi.rmi.JNDIRegistration.getInstance(JNDIRegistration.java:53)
>> ...
>> 
>> I have no idea what might have changed to cause this.
>> 
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> We're using JUDDI-502 for this.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> --Kurt
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/15/11 12:57 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>> I think that unless you set up some exclusions you have to be careful to
run
>>>> 
>>>> mvn clean
>>>> mvn rat:check
>>>> 
>>>> or you get a lot of false arguments about stuff generated in the build....
that might be why you get a larger number of problems than I did.
>>>> 
>>>> thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>> 
>>>> On Jun 15, 2011, at 6:23 AM, Kurt T Stam wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/14/11 7:30 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>>>> -1
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Aside from the build problems that someone might be able to convince
me to overlook, I ran
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> mvn rat:check
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> on the unpacked source zip which showed a lot of files (119) that
did not have appropriate licensing info.  It's possible that some of these can't for some
kind of format reason but the first few I checked certainly could.  If some of these can't
have license headers I think there's a way to include a rat exclusion list where we could
document them.
>>>>> I'm getting: Too many unapproved licenses: 893
>>>>>    1. I think it does not like the copyright notices in the header.
>>>>>        * Copyright 2001-2011 The Apache Software Foundation,
>>>>> 
>>>>>    2. I manually checked some and some files sure have the license missing
completely,         so that sure needs fixing.
>>>>>> I noticed a comment in juddi-portal/README that maven 2.0.6 should
be used.  If this is true for the entire project I think some updating is needed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have some workarounds for the build issues I ran into that involve:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - using derby 10.6.2.1
>>>>>> - using geronimo jta spec instead of (sun?) javaee specs
>>>>>> - using geronimo javamail and changing the NotifierTest.testSMTPNotifier
to expect to pass.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'd also prefer to see a lot of pom cleanup using dependency management
to eliminate repetition of version info.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If everyone's happy with this idea I'm happy to update the poms in
this way.
>>>>> Fine by me.
>>>>>>  It might be better for someone more familiar with all the files
to look at the license issue.
>>>>> ok I will go through a round of clean up on this.
>>>>>> BTW I prefer to see vote emails that give the explicit location of
the source bundle and make clear that it is what is being voted on, not the tag or binaries.
>>>>> Fair enough
>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2011, at 6:20 AM, Kurt T Stam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> At some point the planned 'quick 3.0.5 release', turned into
a much more substantial release. One of
>>>>>>> the major features was to support JAX-WS 2.2, and we beefed up
the client code substantially. Since we
>>>>>>> added so much new code this release is now labeled 3.1.0.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/juddi/tags/juddi-3.1.0/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> nexus: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejuddi-068/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please not that the uddi-ws-3.1.0 comes in 2 flavors: by default
it is compiled against the JAX-WS 2.2 spec, but we also
>>>>>>> release a uddi-ws-3.1.0-jaxws21.jar with a 'jaxws21' classifier
to support JAX-WS 2.1 deployment environments.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Also I have updated the website to reflect the 3.1.0 release:
>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/juddi/site/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please give it a spin and cast your vote in the next 72 hours!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My vote: +1
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --Kurt
> 


Mime
View raw message