On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
Noticed an issue, while we do itest to test the exception messages raised
by
the monitor during the validation, since we are still throwing all kind
of exceptions from the code, for any kind of exception that's
Patches for TUSCANY-2277 are now available with the following changes:
- The monitors now have access to all of the errors and warnings that are
raised during validation in the read, resolve and build phase of an SCA
composite.
- The code still throws all kind of exceptions as it was doing
Hi Simon,
Noticed an issue, while we do itest to test the exception messages raised by
the monitor during the validation, since we are still throwing all kind
of exceptions from the code, for any kind of exception that's thrown the
domain creation is stopped and hence we end-up in returning null
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if plugins want to create their own monitor, what will happen in this
case? Now, the way plugins have control is, by looking at the messageID of
the problem, they can decide whether they want to change the behaviour
So if plugins want to create their own monitor, what will happen in this
case? Now, the way plugins have control is, by looking at the messageID of
the problem, they can decide whether they want to change the behaviour from
a warning to error, etc.
regard
Hasan
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:23 AM,
Hi Simon,
While converting the error/warning messages over to the monitor using
TUSCANY-2277, i realized that it would be a tedious/not a practical job to
include monitor in all parts of the code.
For example, for converting the messages from all the ArtifactProcessor (for
which we have 74
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
While converting the error/warning messages over to the monitor using
TUSCANY-2277, i realized that it would be a tedious/not a practical job to
include monitor in all parts of the code.
For example, for
Simon Laws wrote:
Depending where you actually catch the exception you should be able to
continue on and process the next artifact.
Hmmm, the idea with monitors is to allow the processing code to report
warnings and continue or multiple errors per artifact for example.
Not sure about how
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Simon Laws wrote:
Depending where you actually catch the exception you should be able to
continue on and process the next artifact.
Hmmm, the idea with monitors is to allow the processing code to report
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/25/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:39 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Simon,
Hi Simon,
Thanks for your detailed comments, that gives a clear picture. I have now
opened a JIRA (TUSCANY-2277) to address this issue. By this defect we
will standardize the way messages are logged into the monitor.
Will keep things posted in this thread for any complicated situations and if
i
On 4/25/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:39 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Simon,
I opened JIRA 2260 and attached a second batch of validation test
cases.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:39 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I opened JIRA 2260 and attached a second batch of validation test cases.
regards
Hasan
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:16 AM, Hasan
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:39 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I opened JIRA 2260 and attached a second batch of validation test cases.
regards
Hasan
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:16 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon
I opened JIRA 2255 and
Hi Simon
I opened JIRA 2255 and attached a patch for the new testcases.
Hasan
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon
I opened JIRA 2255 and attached a patch for the new testcases.
Hasan
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Simon,
I opened JIRA 2260 and attached a second batch of validation test cases.
regards
Hasan
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:16 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon
I opened JIRA 2255 and attached a patch for the new testcases.
Hasan
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:58 PM,
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
We should have an api for plugins to provide a resource bundle. This api
probably needs to be on the monitor or somewhere, i am not
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I looked at the new Monitor and Problem interfaces. What do getMessageId()
and getMessageParams() actually return? is MessageId a way to categorize
the
error message?
regards
Hasan
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008
Hi Simon,
We should have an api for plugins to provide a resource bundle. This api
probably needs to be on the monitor or somewhere, i am not sure. But the
scenario occurs when plugins want to use the default Monitor but still want
to use their own resource bundle for messageIDs.
regards
Hasan
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
We should have an api for plugins to provide a resource bundle. This api
probably needs to be on the monitor or somewhere, i am not sure. But the
scenario occurs when plugins want to use the default Monitor
Hi Simon,
I looked at the new Monitor and Problem interfaces. What do getMessageId()
and getMessageParams() actually return? is MessageId a way to categorize the
error message?
regards
Hasan
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I was wondering
Hi Simon,
I was wondering if i can cook up some validation test cases if they do not
exist. Or should we wait until the monitor issue is resolved ?
Hasan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I dont think using an underlying tuscany jdk logger
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I was wondering if i can cook up some validation test cases if they do not
exist. Or should we wait until the monitor issue is resolved ?
Hasan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:05 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Hasan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I dont think using an underlying tuscany jdk logger would be useful to
plugins as they may not want to log, rather show it
Hi Simon,
I dont think using an underlying tuscany jdk logger would be useful to
plugins as they may not want to log, rather show it somewhere else such as
console etc. Tuscany can use an underlying logger in it's own monitor ( as
it uses today). But i think the first approach of using a monitor
Hi Hasan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I dont think using an underlying tuscany jdk logger would be useful to
plugins as they may not want to log, rather show it somewhere else such as
console etc.
Agreed. Thinking about this some more
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
Thank you for the good information. First up i am trying to verify whether
the schema validation works when we point to our schemas. Can you let me
know what is a simple error that i can introduce so that i can
Hi Simon,
I am on revision 634808. The ContributionServiceImpl has changed since then,
and with the one that i have, it would lead through the CompositeProcessor
instead of the CompositeDocumentProcessor. Hence the difference in
exceptions..
Also, dont you think that with the error that you got
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I am on revision 634808. The ContributionServiceImpl has changed since
then,
and with the one that i have, it would lead through the CompositeProcessor
instead of the CompositeDocumentProcessor. Hence the
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I am on revision 634808. The ContributionServiceImpl has changed since
then,
and with the one that i have, it would lead through
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Hasan Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Currently, i see that we have various places where we can plug in
validation
monitoring. Some of the ones that i found are in the
ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder as shown below:
public static CompositeBuilder
Hi Simon,
Thank you for the good information. First up i am trying to verify whether
the schema validation works when we point to our schemas. Can you let me
know what is a simple error that i can introduce so that i can verify this?
I tried doing this to my composite file (In block red):
Hi Simon,
One more point is to make the CompositeBuilderMonitor a true plugin or an
extension point. So that external implementations can define their own and
use them without modifying tuscany code. As of now the only way i see to
pass in our own monitor is in places like the code below where
Simon,
Another interesting thought is that the monitor should have a way for
plugins to tell runtime on whether to fail or not fail at all. I am not sure
i am clear, but as an example, this exception is thrown in
CompositeProcessor.read()
throw new ContributionReadException(
Unexpected
Currently, i see that we have various places where we can plug in validation
monitoring. Some of the ones that i found are in the
ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder as shown below:
public static CompositeBuilder createCompositeBuilder(AssemblyFactory
assemblyFactory,
36 matches
Mail list logo
