Jetspeed 2
  1. Jetspeed 2
  2. JS2-46

Upgrade to PicoContainer-1.0-final

    Details

    • Type: Task Task
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 2.0-a1
    • Fix Version/s: 2.0-dev/cvs, 2.0-a1
    • Component/s: Dependencies
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      PicoConatiner 1.0 final is now available, we should upgarade ASAP.

        Activity

        Hide
        Scott T Weaver added a comment -

        Good News!!! I have successfuly upgraded to:

        PicoContainer-1.0
        NanoContainer-1.0
        nanocontainer-proxytoys-1.0 (HotSwapping was moved here)
        (added) proxytoys-0.1 (needed to support the above)
        groovy-rc1-snapshot
        asm-1.4.3 (bytecode util that supports groovy)
        (added) asm-util-1.4.1 (same as above)

        I will be committing my changes in the morning.

        -Scott

        Show
        Scott T Weaver added a comment - Good News!!! I have successfuly upgraded to: PicoContainer-1.0 NanoContainer-1.0 nanocontainer-proxytoys-1.0 (HotSwapping was moved here) (added) proxytoys-0.1 (needed to support the above) groovy-rc1-snapshot asm-1.4.3 (bytecode util that supports groovy) (added) asm-util-1.4.1 (same as above) I will be committing my changes in the morning. -Scott
        Hide
        Scott T Weaver added a comment -

        It should relatively simple. Just replace NanoQuickAssembler with the content of the script it calls. I suggest we do it one instance at a time and write a test case that just verifies the engine starts.

        Show
        Scott T Weaver added a comment - It should relatively simple. Just replace NanoQuickAssembler with the content of the script it calls. I suggest we do it one instance at a time and write a test case that just verifies the engine starts.
        Hide
        David Sean Taylor added a comment -

        Yes, I've already hit that error and thats why I had to freeze the version of Pico and Nano.
        I suggest that we use those frozen versions in all sub-projects and not use the snapshot

        What kind of effort is it to remove NanoQuickAssembler?

        Show
        David Sean Taylor added a comment - Yes, I've already hit that error and thats why I had to freeze the version of Pico and Nano. I suggest that we use those frozen versions in all sub-projects and not use the snapshot What kind of effort is it to remove NanoQuickAssembler?
        Hide
        Scott T Weaver added a comment -

        There are cascading issues with upgrading nanoconatiner (which is required) along with Picoconatiner that causes the NanoQuickAssembler to fail. I feel we should just wait until we have eliminated NanoQuickAssembler before proceeding. Fixing NanoQuickAssembler would require even more nasty hacks that I don't even want to think about introducing into the codebase.

        Show
        Scott T Weaver added a comment - There are cascading issues with upgrading nanoconatiner (which is required) along with Picoconatiner that causes the NanoQuickAssembler to fail. I feel we should just wait until we have eliminated NanoQuickAssembler before proceeding. Fixing NanoQuickAssembler would require even more nasty hacks that I don't even want to think about introducing into the codebase.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Scott T Weaver
            Reporter:
            Scott T Weaver
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development