Hi,
I whole-heartedly admit to the comfort of being able to run and debug within
IDE. Its really very useful to get a grasp of how the runtime works. For
example, if one were to understand the role of loaders, builders, the wire
service and the invocation pattern, running a sample test or an
Here's the vote on this I said [1] I'd start to get closure on this issue.
The proposal is to have top-level pom for the Java SCA project that enables
building all the modules together - kernel, services, runtimes, extensions
etc, and for that to work all those modules need to use the same
As part of the modularization work its been suggested separating the Java
component container out from the core to be an extension just like the other
extensions. For example, see [1] and diagram [2]. Lets have a discussion on
this specific proposal trying to get some consensus and then vote on
I've been playing around with ways to avoid having to repeatedly parse large
schema where the performance isn't great. The scenario is that I have a base
set of types from a schema that I need (e.g. WSDL schema) and a variable set
of types from some user defined schema. So each time I want a
+1. Atleast in the spirit of getting this going for now to enable people to
get on with the r Trunk rightaway as one piece than having to first deal
with its composition. Thanks.
- Venkat
On 3/28/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the vote on this I said [1] I'd start to get
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Dan Murphy updated TUSCANY-1175:
Patch Info: [Patch Available]
Tests for duration dates/times should not be in accepted test
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Dan Murphy updated TUSCANY-1175:
Attachment: Tuscany-1175.patch
Patch simply adds @Ignore to the method in question... other
Pete Robbins wrote:
XSDHelperPtr myHelper = HelperProvider::getXSDHelper();
myHelper-defineTypes(wsdlHelper-getDefinedTypes());
which creates a new XSDHelper and DataFactory containing the Types and
Properties from the wsdlHelper + all the schema information (which is held
in the
On 3/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
On one of the modularization threads it talked about trying to make SCDL and
assembly more consumable like WSDL and WSDL4J, would that be the things in
the Metadata Layer box at the bottom?
No replies to this yet so I'll bring it up
Pete Robbins wrote:
XSDHelperPtr myHelper = HelperProvider::getXSDHelper();
myHelper-defineTypes(wsdlHelper-getDefinedTypes());
which creates a new XSDHelper and DataFactory containing the Types and
Properties from the wsdlHelper + all the schema information (which is held
in the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1181?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Dan Murphy updated TUSCANY-1181:
Attachment: Tuscany-1181.patch
Rename of XSDSerialisationTest to XSDHelperTest (since it tests
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1181?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Dan Murphy updated TUSCANY-1181:
Patch Info: [Patch Available]
XSDSerializationTest is Tuscany-specific
+1!
...ant
On 3/27/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to nominate Adriano Crestani to become a Tuscany committer.
Adriano started by helping on Java DAS, and recently is contributing a new
DAS C++ Implementation, he has also participated in discussions and is
helping
+1
On 28/03/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1!
...ant
On 3/27/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to nominate Adriano Crestani to become a Tuscany committer.
Adriano started by helping on Java DAS, and recently is contributing a
new
DAS C++ Implementation, he
Hi,
There are a number of patches we could do with being applied to the CTS...
is anyone available to apply then ?
Specifically 1181 1175 seem fine and there are also patches submitted for
most others in this component.
Assuming the approach in 1181 is acceptable then maybe we could do the
Luciano Resende wrote:
I'd like to nominate Adriano Crestani to become a Tuscany committer.
Adriano started by helping on Java DAS, and recently is contributing a
new
DAS C++ Implementation, he has also participated in discussions and is
helping expand the Tuscany community around his college
+1 from me
Kelvin.
On 27/03/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to nominate Adriano Crestani to become a Tuscany committer.
Adriano started by helping on Java DAS, and recently is contributing a new
DAS C++ Implementation, he has also participated in discussions and is
What is the current status of CTS testcases ? I'm getting the following
issue...
---
T E S T S
---
Running test.sdo21.vendor.tuscany.tests.AdoptedCtsTestSuite
default null
Tests run: 26,
Hi Luciano,
Once the patches are applied I believe all these errors should go... The
XSDSerializationTest is renamed by the patch for 1175 (from memory I think
that's the right one).
We then also need to decide on all the ones we want in the adopted suite
(since there are over 300 tests now)
Hi Raymond
Simplicity is good, and being able to run/debug directly from IDE in a
simple way certainly helps our own productivity as well.
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
On 3/28/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I whole-heartedly admit to the comfort
Sorry, my bad...
the DynamicTypesFromSchemaTestCase will still fail - see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1178 but the approach in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1181 could be used to fix this
also (also should have read 1181 in above update, my memory fails me :)
I think I have already gave enough of my reasons to why this is needed, so
here is my +1 .
On 3/28/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1. Atleast in the spirit of getting this going for now to enable people
to
get on with the r Trunk rightaway as one piece than having to first deal
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luciano Resende resolved TUSCANY-1175.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: Java-SDO-M3
Patch applied at revision
+1. It should be really good to have somebody from a university on board.
Thanks.
- Venkat
On 3/28/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to nominate Adriano Crestani to become a Tuscany committer.
Adriano started by helping on Java DAS, and recently is contributing a new
DAS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1195?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luciano Resende updated TUSCANY-1195:
-
Fix Version/s: (was: Java-SDO-M3)
Java-SDO-CTS-Mx
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luciano Resende updated TUSCANY-1175:
-
Fix Version/s: (was: Java-SDO-M3)
Java-SDO-CTS-Mx
Meeraj,
As you posted in this email, I wanted to play around with Tuscany's JMX
capabilities a little bit.
However I only had access to information delivered by the JVM itself,
but nothing related to the runtime. I started the runtime this way:
java -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Hi,
I whole-heartedly admit to the comfort of being able to run and debug
within
IDE. Its really very useful to get a grasp of how the runtime works.
For
example, if one were to understand the role of loaders, builders, the
wire
service and the invocation pattern,
java.lang.ClassCastException org.eclipse.emf.ecore.impl.DynamicEObjectImpl
incompatible with commonj.sdo.DataObject
---
Key: TUSCANY-1196
URL:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1196?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Christian Landbo Frederiksen updated TUSCANY-1196:
--
Attachment: TestSDOErronousSchemaReferences.java
Hi,
I'll go ahead to commit the last piece which integrates the databinding
framework with the latest core if there are no other concerns.
The new picture will be:
kernel/core: will depend on databinding-framework (the dependency would be
removed as the core is further decomposed)
+1 from me.
It is a simple approach which will make it easier for people to build
our runtime and see the various pieces fit together, and I think it's
going to help our community work together on a common level of our codebase.
Luciano Resende wrote:
I think I have already gave enough of my
Hi,
I've started work on the design of the Tuscany LDAP DAS, and I find myself
using Ecore concepts/models like EStructuralFeature, etc. quite a bit,
when referring
to members of EClassifiers (SDO Classes), etc.
Does Tuscany have something similar/equivalent to Ecore that I should be
using
I have made a first pass of an outline for a Java SCA User guide. I have
began to add in some content in a couple of places. Please take a look...
post comments, details attachments to the wiki page, fill in any missing
information. I am an information developer, not a developer, so your
+1 from me.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:37 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Adriano Crestani for Tuscany Committer
I'd like to nominate Adriano Crestani to become a Tuscany
On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:51 AM, ant elder wrote:
Here's the vote on this I said [1] I'd start to get closure on this
issue.
The proposal is to have top-level pom for the Java SCA project that
enables
building all the modules together - kernel, services, runtimes,
extensions
etc, and for
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
By reading through a bunch of e-mails on this mailing list and adding
my imagination, I put together a conceptual diagram at the following
wiki page to illustrate the kernel modulization.
On 3/28/07, Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'll go ahead to commit the last piece which integrates the databinding
framework with the latest core if there are no other concerns.
The new picture will be:
kernel/core: will depend on databinding-framework (the dependency would be
ant elder wrote:
On 3/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
On one of the modularization threads it talked about trying to make
SCDL and
assembly more consumable like WSDL and WSDL4J, would that be the
things in
the Metadata Layer box at the bottom?
No replies to this yet so
I have expressed my views on all modules sharing the same version and a top
down build in quite a bit of detail in my previous emails on the same
subject. Unfortunately, I will have to vote -1 on this.
Meeraj
From: Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To:
The work around JMX is still half-baked. Though it does register all the
available components and provides a read-only view of properties. The server
currently use the RMI agent adaptor. So you should be able to connet through
a clinet like jconsole and view the registered components.
Ta
Would something like what I outlined in this email[1] be more amenable
to people voting against this proposal?
-Bert
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg16062.html
On 3/28/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have expressed my views on all modules
Hi,
I think there're confusions on a few related topics which have been tangled
against each other. Let me try to clarify before we agree or disagree.
Please be patient when you read through this lengthy e-mail :-).
Issue 1: Maintain dependencies
---
We
Sorry for the delay, I've been out and then tied up at work...
My first comment is most of the code is organized the way you describe.
I do have several big issues with details:
1. A main tenet of the current runtime architecture is that there is
one kernel implementation capable of being
Hi, Bert.
I think I'm with you on the proposal. The rule of the game should be very
simple as follows:
Let's agree on a set of modules that are supposed to work together for the
next target (a release or a demo), then define an assembly and pom.xml to
enforce the cohesions.
Thanks,
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Discussion] Tuscany kernel modulization
Nice diagram, Raymond, thanks for putting this
Hi,
Thank you for the information. It seems to be helpful to follow the
recommendations from JSR-250 and I agree with you that it should be
addressed by the spec.
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday,
ant elder wrote:
As part of the modularization work its been suggested separating the Java
component container out from the core to be an extension just like the
other
extensions. For example, see [1] and diagram [2]. Lets have a
discussion on
this specific proposal trying to get some
Jim, Meeraj,
If the stream of -1's contnue, am afraid there isn't going to be a
single release at all.
thx,
dims
On 3/28/07, Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:51 AM, ant elder wrote:
Here's the vote on this I said [1] I'd start to get closure on this
issue.
The
Hi,
I checked with the spec and added my comments below.
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Hi,
For this to happen, mustn't reference211 first be promoted to its
composite
level i.e. as a reference of Composite2. For a component reference
that is
not wired, I did not find the specs (from whatever I
This is an indication that the vote was initiated prematurely, before
agreement was reached. I would suggest withdrawing it until
individuals' concerns have been addressed unless we think this issue
is irreconcilable and that a decision should be forced.
--
Jeremy
On Mar 28, 2007, at 3:24
Hi, Jim.
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Discussion] Tuscany kernel modulization
Sorry for the delay, I've been out and then
I don't believe this vote was initiated prematurely.
This has been debated for a long time, we've never really got complete
agreement, but we've also never voted on it. This vote started directly from
a thread that started on 22nd, (though that was spawned from an earlier
thread), when
Dims,
I don't think there is a stream of -1s. This is an issue on which,
unfortunately, I disagree fundamnetally from a technical perspective, with the
percieved majority view. It will be hypocritical of me to +1, if I don't agree
with it.
However, I am happy to go with the majority view,
Meeraj,
well go over the archives and count how many times you, jim and jeremy
have -1'ed something. The correct vote for I am happy to go with the
majority view, if that is what the community wants. is -0 *NOT* -1.
When you do a -1 you are supposed to work hard to come up with a
refined
Sequence composition
Key: TUSCANY-1197
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1197
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: New Feature
Components: Java SDO Implementation
Affects Versions: Java-SDO-Mx
Bringing this up since i see many many parallels between what's
happenning here now and what happened with Avalon. Please don't let
this [4] happen here.
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/avalon-dev/200211.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
[2]
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1197?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Yang ZHONG updated TUSCANY-1197:
Attachment: patch.1197
SequencesTestCase.java
Sequences.java
Dims,
Sorry, I can't speak on behalf of Jim or Jeremy.
As for me, this is only the second time I have voted -1, the other one being
the one on interfaced based models, which has been withdrawn since then. On
this particular vote, I am ok to go with -0, it was a misunderstaning on my
part
Hi Raymond,
Once you have done this, I'd like to get started with syncing up the trunk
for complex and many valued properties since this depends on the databinding
framework to trasform property definitions in SCDLs to JavaObejects.
- Venkat
On 3/28/07, Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
Here is a problem that most of us are facing with the Trunk and is hindering
us to effectively contribute to the trunk. I see there is one solution that
has been proposed to making this simpler with some compromises. If this is
not agreeable what is the alternative for those of us
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On 3/25/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
For example, the variant implementation of the assembly model
has a
number of changes that coupled with what you describe above will
basically
62 matches
Mail list logo
