One more note: Currently, JDO does not use any java API beyond 1.5, so it compiles and would run using old, obsolete jvms.
I think that without a lot more discussion on the user list, we shouldn’t change the required jvm level. Since it has been a while since 1.7 came out, and Oracle no longer supports 1.5, I’d be happy if we discussed changing the minimum level to 1.6. So the real issue is DataNucleus. Is there a need for DataNucleus to require 1.7 or was that a default? Can it be reset to 1.6 with no loss of functionality? Do we have any customer feedback on the version level? Craig > On Mar 13, 2015, at 10:21 AM, Craig L Russell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Attendees: Michael Bouschen, Craig Russell > > Agenda: > > 1. JDO 3.1: Release is ready to be tested, please download it from the > staging repository > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejdo-1000/ > > The release artifacts look good. Still adding checksums to the gpg signature > files. AI Craig ask Apache if this can be avoided. > > Can we get some people to test 3.1 release? > > Download the org apache jdo 3.1 source-release zip file and unzip it. > > Copy or link the providerutil.jar and fscontext.jar files from trunk/lib/ext > to the downloaded lib/ext. > > From the top directory, run mvn clean install. > > After running, go to the tck/target/logs and find the log file timestamped > tck-results. > > Report results to the jdo mail list. > > One result running the tck from Apple MacOSX with java 1.6: > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.apache.jdo:jdo-exectck:3.1:enhance > (default) on project jdo-tck: Execution default of goal > org.apache.jdo:jdo-exectck:3.1:enhance failed: There are 1 services entries > for the JDOEnhancer; there were no valid JDOEnhancer implementations found in > the CLASSPATH. The file META-INF/services/javax.jdo.JDOEnhancer should name > the implementation class. org/datanucleus/api/jdo/JDOEnhancer : Unsupported > major.minor version 51.0 -> [Help 1] > > Apparently DataNucleus is distributed as Java 1.7 (version 51). Is there a > version of DataNucleus that is built with 1.6? Or has DataNucleus joined the > 21st Century? ;-) > > Are there still customers of jdo that are on 1.6 (version 50)? > > The jdo release itself is compiled with 1.5 (version 49). > > 2. New JIRA "Ability to save a (created) query as a named query for later > use" https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-734 > > Looks like a good candidate for 3.2. > > 3. Other issues > > Action Items from weeks past: > [Oct 17 2014] AI Matthew any updates for "Modify specification to address > NoSQL datastores": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-651? > [Feb 28 2014] AI Everyone: take a look at > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-712 > [Feb 28 2014] AI Everyone: take a look at > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-625 > [Dec 13 2013] AI Craig file a JIRA for java.sql.Blob and java.sql.Clob as > persistent field types > [May 10 2013] AI Everyone take a look Apache ISIS and maybe subscribe to ISIS > mail lists. > [Aug 24 2012] AI Craig update the JIRAs JDO-689 JDO-690 and JDO-692 about > JDOHelper methods. In process. > > Craig L Russell > Architect, Oracle > http://db.apache.org/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[email protected] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > Craig L Russell Architect, Oracle http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[email protected] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
