[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello opened a new pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello opened a new pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox

cocorossello opened a new pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693


   Another PR to upgrqade directly to OWB 2.0.17 (the explicit dependency on xbean-asm-util  is not needed now)


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] jgallimore commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox

jgallimore commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662613273


   We still have a number of test failures with this - here's the list of tests that fail for me:
   
   Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 5.558 sec <<< FAILURE!
   observe(org.superbiz.cdi.events.EventTest)  Time elapsed: 4.01 sec  <<< FAILURE!
   Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 61.615 sec <<< FAILURE!
   test(org.superbiz.schedule.events.SchedulerTest)  Time elapsed: 61.573 sec  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] Tests run: 1584, Failures: 21, Errors: 0, Skipped: 36, Time elapsed: 336.729 s <<< FAILURE! - in TestSuite
   [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.async.RequestScopeEventAsyncTest)  Time elapsed: 40.635 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.jms.RequestScopeEventMessageDeliveryTest)  Time elapsed: 0.294 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.timeout.RequestScopeEventTimeoutTest)  Time elapsed: 0.246 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] resolutionWithRepeatableQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.definition.qualifier.repeatable.RepeatableQualifiersTest)  Time elapsed: 0.007 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testParameterizedResolvedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest)  Time elapsed: 0.004 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testSimpleEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest)  Time elapsed: 0.003 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetAnnotatedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.002 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetBean(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.002 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetMember(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.002 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.009 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testIsTransient(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.001 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testSucessfulTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.priority.transactional.TransactionalPriorityObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.022 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testFailedTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.033 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testObserverFailedTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.019 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testSucessfullTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.035 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] afterSuccessObserverIsNotNotifiedAfterTxRollBack(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.roolback.TransactionalObserverRollbackTest)  Time elapsed: 0.022 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] notifyAcceptingConsumerNotified(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.configurators.observerMethod.ObserverMethodConfiguratorTest)  Time elapsed: 0 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.lifecycle.processInjectionPoint.ProcessInjectionPointFiredTest)  Time elapsed: 0.167 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] arquillianBeforeClass(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.lifecycle.processInjectionTarget.ContainerEventTest)  Time elapsed: 0.164 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.lookup.modules.specialization.alternative.Specialization06Test)  Time elapsed: 0.002 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] Tests run: 1571, Failures: 17, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 940.413 s <<< FAILURE! - in TestSuite
   [ERROR] testEventsFired(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.request.event.timeout.RequestScopeEventTimeoutTest)  Time elapsed: 10.046 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] resolutionWithRepeatableQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.definition.qualifier.repeatable.RepeatableQualifiersTest)  Time elapsed: 0.185 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testParameterizedResolvedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest)  Time elapsed: 0.177 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testSimpleEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.EventMetadataTest)  Time elapsed: 0.022 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetAnnotatedType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.174 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetBean(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.021 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetMember(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.03 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetQualifiers(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.025 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testGetType(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.019 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testIsTransient(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.metadata.injectionpoint.EventMetadataInjectionPointTest)  Time elapsed: 0.028 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testSucessfulTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.priority.transactional.TransactionalPriorityObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.311 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testFailedTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.294 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testObserverFailedTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.025 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testSucessfullTransaction(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.TransactionalObserverTest)  Time elapsed: 0.029 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] afterSuccessObserverIsNotNotifiedAfterTxRollBack(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.transactional.roolback.TransactionalObserverRollbackTest)  Time elapsed: 0.171 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] notifyAcceptingConsumerNotified(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.configurators.observerMethod.ObserverMethodConfiguratorTest)  Time elapsed: 0.03 s  <<< FAILURE!
   [ERROR] testEvent(org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.lookup.modules.specialization.alternative.Specialization06Test)  Time elapsed: 0.025 s  <<< FAILURE!
   


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662703666


   Hi, there is something I don't understand.
   
   Looking at the SchedulerTest:
   
   It works in OWB 2.0.12 and it doesn't in 2.0.16 or 17.
   
   The stacktrace (2.0.16) is:
   
    at org.apache.webbeans.ee.event.TransactionalEventNotifier.registerTransactionSynchronization(TransactionalEventNotifier.java:106)
    at org.apache.openejb.cdi.OpenEJBTransactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(OpenEJBTransactionService.java:94)
    at org.apache.webbeans.event.NotificationManager.doFireSync(NotificationManager.java:726)
    at org.apache.webbeans.event.NotificationManager.doFireEvent(NotificationManager.java:662)
    at org.apache.webbeans.event.NotificationManager.fireEvent(NotificationManager.java:646)
    at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.fireEvent(BeanManagerImpl.java:495)
    at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.fireEvent(BeanManagerImpl.java:469)
    at org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.fireEvent(BeanManagerImpl.java:453)
    at org.apache.webbeans.container.InjectableBeanManager.fireEvent(InjectableBeanManager.java:109)
    at org.superbiz.schedule.events.Scheduler.timeout(Scheduler.java:54)
   
   
   In 2.0.12 version is calling
   
                           invokeObserverMethod(event, metadata, observer);
   
   and in 2.0.16 is going for
                           transactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(phase, observer, event);
   
   So it has to do something with this commit:
   
   https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans/commit/50a97460d3e824f298c52f98195a7d7ea5ac52af#diff-861b38d68e2a8d4b2ea08ab08d7ac29e
   
   This is 2.0.12:
   
                   if(phase != null && phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
                   {
                       if (async)
                       {
                           throw new WebBeansConfigurationException("Async Observer Methods can only use TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS!");
                       }
   
                       TransactionService transactionService = webBeansContext.getService(TransactionService.class);
                       if(transactionService != null)
                       {
                           transactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(phase, observer, event);
                       }
                       else
                       {
                           invokeObserverMethod(event, metadata, observer);
                       }                    
                   }
                   else
                   {
                       if (async)
                       {
                           completableFutures.add(invokeObserverMethodAsync(event, metadata, observer, notificationOptions));
                       }
                       else
                       {
                           invokeObserverMethod(event, metadata, observer);
                       }
                   }
   
   (so when phase is IN_PROGRESS it won't try to get the TransactionService)
   
   
   and this is 2.0.16:
   
   
                   if (phase == null || phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
                   {
                       invokeObserverMethod(context, observer);
                   }
                   else
                   {
                       TransactionService transactionService = webBeansContext.getTransactionService();
                       if(transactionService != null)
                       {
                           transactionService.registerTransactionSynchronization(phase, observer, context.getEvent());
                       }
                       else
                       {
                           invokeObserverMethod(context, observer);
                       }
                   }
   
   (So when phase is IN_PROGRESS it will get the transactionService and it fails with that message).
   
   
   
   Is this condition correct in 2.0.16?


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662704395


   @rmannibucau can you please take a look on latest comment?


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662707022


   I can confirm that changing the condition:
   
                   if (phase == null || phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
   
   to
   
                   if (phase == null || phase == TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
   
   makes the SchedulerTest pass (haven't tested others)


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662707022


   I can confirm that changing the condition:
   
                   if (phase == null || phase != TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
   
   to
   
                   if (phase == null || phase == TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS)
   
   makes the SchedulerTest and the EventTest pass  (I don't know how to run tck tests, sorry)


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

rmannibucau commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662717134


   @cocorossello right, should be ==


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

rmannibucau edited a comment on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662717134


   @cocorossello right, should be ==. To run tcks just go in tck module and run cdi submodules.


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662880032


   We will have to wait for OWB 2.0.18


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

rmannibucau commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662882947


   Guess a snapshot can be already tested (just deployed it).


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.17

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-662888382


   updated PR to use the snapshot


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-714790946


   This cannot be merged, it needs CXF to use xbean 4.18. See org.apache.cxf.common.util.getASMClass


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-714790946


   This cannot be merged, it needs CXF to use asm9. See org.apache.cxf.common.util.getASMClass


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-714790946


   This cannot be merged, it needs CXF to use asm9. See org.apache.cxf.common.util.ASMHelper.getASMClass


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-724989924


   Can I ask for a full build to see if anything breaks. It's working in our environment (although we don't use openjpa). The upgrades are needed for jdk 15/16 support


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello edited a comment on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-724989924


   Can I ask for a full build to see if anything breaks?. It's working in our environment (although we don't use openjpa). The upgrades are needed for jdk 15/16 support


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] rmannibucau commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

rmannibucau commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-725287397


   @cocorossello openjpa will need next release to use asm9 (it is in discussion) so you likely bring asm8+asm9 right now. Also the cxf upgrade brings a lot of jakarta, activation and jboss-rmi dependencies which should be excluded IMHO.
   
   side note: strictly speaking OWB does not need the upgrade to support java 16 (it is coded to not need it) but tomee core and cxf do.


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-725288764


   Thanks, then I will wait until next openjpa release and I will exclude new dependencies coming from cxf upgrade (comparing with those of tomee 8.0.4)


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-729211777


   Hi, I've made some dependency alignments. Now the only dependency differences I can see with tomee 8.0.4 are:
   
   reactive-streams-1.0.3.jar: New dependency from cxf, I guess it shouldn't be excluded
   tomee-security-8.0.5-SNAPSHOT: New module
   xbean-asm8-shaded-4.17.jar: It will be aligned to asm9 once openjpa its upgraded
   xbean-asm-util-4.18.jar: New dependency from xbean.
   
   So I will wait to upgrade openjpa and then see if build passes


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [tomee] cocorossello commented on pull request #693: Owb2.0.19

GitBox
In reply to this post by GitBox

cocorossello commented on pull request #693:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/693#issuecomment-745580735


   Hi,
   I have upgraded to use latest openjpa snapshot.
   
   Can I request a full jenkins build to see if anything fails? Right now I can see that dependencies are fine, pulling only asm9


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]


12