Hi guys,
Just want to send a quick note to say I have decided to move on. I would
like to wish you guys all the best.
Thanks
Meeraj
From: Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving on
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007
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:
; Salvucci, Sebastian; Maniasi, Sebastian; Voos, Javier A; Morin,
Ricardo A
Subject: FW: JXTA is working now
FYI
Cristian G. Fiorentino
Intel Corporation - ASDC - Eng.
Argentina Software Development Center
+54-351-414-5595
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath
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,
.
thanks,
dims
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/avalon-dev/200211.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
On 3/28/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dims,
I don't think there is a stream of -1s. This is an issue on which,
unfortunately, I disagree fundamnetally from a technical
?
Ok, I hope it is all useful and if you need any further help, please
do
not hesitate to contact me.
Best regards,
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:52 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: RE
the same
ones as trunk. To avoid conflict in the snapshot repo we should not
deploy jars built from this.
--
Jeremy
On Mar 22, 2007, at 7:39 AM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Jeremy,
This is the definitve list, thanks to Mario.
java/spec/commonj/
java/spec/sca-api-r1.0/
java/sca/kernel/
java
Subject: Re: Tag for TSSS demo code
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:08:35 +0100
On 3/26/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon,
Did you start ActiveMQ before you started the master?
Ta
Meeraj
From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev
@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tag for TSSS demo code
On 3/26/07, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/26/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon,
Did you start ActiveMQ before you started the master?
Ta
Meeraj
From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev
yet. I am still struggling with it.
I'll come back to you as soon as I have any news about it.
Regards,
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 8:16 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: RE: Discovery update
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Jim Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 24 March 2007 07:34
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Objective of the following sandbox -
tuscany/sandbox/sebastien/java
On Mar 23, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Davanum
, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luciano,
Your hijacked version of pom portrays all the issues
associated with a
top down pom with a single version in a complex project. You have
included the modules you want to build. It may not be of
any use to
me, if I want to build
Luciano,
Your hijacked version of pom portrays all the issues associated with a
top down pom with a single version in a complex project. You have
included the modules you want to build. It may not be of any use to me,
if I want to build a separate set of modules. So what is the point in
Hi,
Now that the SPI is getting stable and we have the initial end-to-end
story for federation working, I would suggest we plan for the final
release for kernel 2.0, with emphasis on federation and user experience.
I was thinking about aiming for a beta in June in time for TSSJS
Barcelona and the
Simon,
All the work that was done for the demo has been committed. I posted a
set of build instructions to get the demo running for Mario. However,
the information is scattered across multiple emails. I can collate them
and repost it to the list, if that helps.
Thanks
Meeraj
-Original
Mario,
AFAIK extensions in trunk is still in a bit of a flux. If you want to
run the demo, you don't need to run the extensions (the demo uses Java
container with local bindings), I will try to post a dfeinitive list of
tasks to build and run the demo later in the day, which will be useful
to
the good news, I was not able to start the servers (take a look
at the attachment to see the errors)
Do you have any idea what could be happening?
Thanks and regards,
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 10:13 AM
build as much or as little as they wish. If
you can post the list, I get those modules tagged and deployed later
today.
--
Jeremy
On Mar 22, 2007, at 6:13 AM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Mario,
AFAIK extensions in trunk is still in a bit of a flux. If you want to
run the demo, you don't need
Simon,
My reply to Mario has all the detail to run the demo.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Simon Laws [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 12:00 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: ServerSide Presentation and Demo
On 3/22/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath
bindings.
HTH
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Simon Laws [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 12:22 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: A question of federation - was: Planning kernel release 2.0
On 3/22/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Now
and regards,
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 10:13 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: RE: Compilation status
Mario,
AFAIK extensions in trunk is still in a bit of a flux. If you want to
run the demo, you
Ant,
I would like to understand more about what we mean by top down build
here. We didn't use to build SCA and SDO in one go, even when we had a
top down build. Now the SCA project is growing in complexity with
better modularization, in terms of of how various functional areas are
modularized and
Ta, Actually Jeremy and Jim did most of it.
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 March 2007 20:44
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: ServerSide Presentation and Demo
Jim and Meeraj,
Congratulations! Any chance the presentation was
I think this was the final email, in the thread of discussion we had on
different ways of doing the model.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Davanum Srinivas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:54 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Working in trunk,
Hi,
I am glad you brought this point up.
You mentioned about constant confrontation between two sets of people. I
would say, unfortunately, this has been caused by a lack of diversity in
the community.
I hope most of these confrontations are based on technical differences.
For the first
Sorry, I missed one.
You need to build /java/sca/core-samples/common as well.
HTH
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Antollini, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 5:30 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Demo Build error
Hi Meeraj,
There is an
Also did you build /java/sca/runtime? That is where server.start,
standalone-host etc are located. Since our last communication I have
also added /java/distribution/demo.app, which needs to be built as well.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Antollini, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I have temporarily replaced the JXTA discovery service with JMS (Jim, this
is important you for tomorrow's demo).
We have been using JXTA so far for discovery. We use PDP (Peer Discovery
Protocol) for maintaining the federated runtime topology adn PRP (Peer
Resolver Protocol) for
Mario,
I will try to be as detailed as I can, if you need further info, pls ask.
Tuscany code structure is roughly organized into kernel, runtime, services
and extensions. There are other modules like plugins, console etc, which are
not relavant in the context of this discussion. There is
Hi,
I would like a more elaborate explanation on what is meant in this context
by interfaces, factory classes and separate implementations. As we are now,
our model classes just encapsulate state, with hardly any behaviour. We
quite nicely separate model from the runtime artifacts by moving
I can't see how kernel modularization is related to interface based models.
Model is only part of the SPI, SPI also provides a set os services, which
all have well-defined contracts. I am not sure what extra benefits we have
by supporting different data binding mechanisms for the model objects.
Hi,
I have been looking at the type parameter GROUP that has been added to PCD,
which is not formalized anywhere down the inheritance tree. This means, the
marshallers and unmarshallers won't be able to work against a static type
that can be reflectively introspected at runtime, becuase of
Hi,
Following on from the realier discussion thread, services that are included
in runtime/services are considered as promodial services. What are the
implications of a service being a primodial service, in terms of which cl
loads the service? Any service implementation that has its service
Hi,
I have got the JXTA discovery and Jetty service integrated into the demo
distribution. I am able to start the master and two slaves from the
installation image each communicating with JXTA and the Jetty service is
also starting up from different ports. Next, I am going to llok at servlet
Thanks Jeremy.
Mario, I think Jeremy has covered most of your points. If you need any more
clarifications or have further queries, please feel free to ask. As Jeremy
said, any help in these areas, ongoing and/or especially in the next two
days :) will be highly appreciated.
Ta
Meeraj
+1
We should get the federation story implemented for the next kernel
release. I think the development for federation is looking in good
shape, and we should most probably have an end to end story, for the
TSSS demo with couple of transports. In terms of extensions we also need
to look at porting
K, Jim that is done.
Ta
From: Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: more changes for physical definitions
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:05:39 -0700
I've go most of the Wire, InvocationChain, ProxyService, and
InvocationChain
Hi,
I have been trying to list the outstanding tasks to get federation done and
have the demo working for TSS. These are the things I have in my list,
1. Contribution service on the controller
2. Assembly service on the controller
3. Generation of physical definitions from the model (may be
Ant,
I don't get it either, I use dual core as well. The smoke test laucher
uses a process drainer on a different thread that drains the System.out
and System.err, for the spawned process. I can have a look when I get
home in the evening (sorry I can't access the SVN server from work).
Ta
Meeraj
Sure, I will do that. Cuurently attach method is agnostic to whether it
is forward or callback. If we have specific ones, would the signature
change?
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jim Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 11:55 AM
To:
Jim,
Some of this is already implemented in the federated deployer.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jim Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 March 2007 20:02
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Federated deployer, connector and simplifying the kernel
I'm starting to
I can start on the RMI. Also, one of my colleagues at work at written an
abstract framework for Hessian binding. It is mainly used for a Hessian
Mule connector, however much of the code is pretty agnostic to Mule.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jim Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim,
Is the MPL available in the registry. Or is it going to be the app CL looked
up from the registry and the MPCL created from the looked up app CL and the
system CL?
Ta
Meeraj
From: Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject:
A related question I had was, wouldn't most of the logic in
JavaComponent etc for handling properties, introspection etc go into the
generated instance factory bytecode?
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08 March 2007 04:08
To:
+1
-Original Message-
From: Jim Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 7:12 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0-alpha of SCA Java kernel
On Mar 5, 2007, at 5:03 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
I have posted release candidates of the
Sorry, I will do that this afternoon.
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 1:37 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Sourcecheck failures in core
I get a a bunch of sourcecheck failures in core (including PMD
failures) -
+1
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Moving modules to contrib for this release
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 13:47:10 -0800
There are a few modules in the runtime that I don't think should be
included in this release:
is non-crytographic,
specifically, BC is used only for generating PKCS#1 certificates from
already generated key pairs and for formatting PKCS#10 certificate
signing requests.
Mike
Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Hi,
We are shipping the JXTA RI with the next release of Tuscany
(http
Hi,
Just wanted to confirm a few things before I hack on ..
1. The unit of transmission between the master and slave is always going
to be a PCS.
2. The PCS will contain collections of PWDs and PCDs
3. I am assuming we will use different namespaces for different types of
PCDs (Java PCD for
Jim,
As it is now, the marshaller framework only deals with marshalling and
unmarshalling physical change sets (PhysicalChangeSet class in SPI). A
physical change set is composed of zero or more physical component
definitions (sub types of PhysicalComponentDefinition in SPI) and zero or
more
Cool.
Once I get the work I am doing on the slave side of federation out of way, I
can port the groovy component type to 1.0 and also look at a JXTA binding
based on the stuff we have been working on for discovery.
Ta
Meeraj
From: Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To:
of organizations. Unfortunately each exporter must
file their own notices. JXTA's use of Bouncy Castle is non-crytographic,
specifically, BC is used only for generating PKCS#1 certificates from
already generated key pairs and for formatting PKCS#10 certificate
signing requests.
Mike
Meeraj Kunnumpurath
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 12:29 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Bouncycastle export notice
Hi,
We are shipping the JXTA RI with the next release of Tuscany
(http://incubator.apache.org/tuscany/). Have you filed
Hi,
Apparently bouncycastle uses a patented algorithm in their distribution.
Could someone from the dev team kindly let me know whether the RI uses
any of the patented code?
Thanks
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21,
Jeremy,
Does that mean, we need to state on the page below that Tuscany uses
Bouncycastle? Also (just out of interest), aren't the export
restrictions applicable against certain crypto operations rather than a
library?
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL
Hi,
Jeremy fixed it last night.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Raymond Feng [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 6:17 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Standalone build problem
Hi,
I don't see this problem on Windows XP with IBM or SUN JDK 5.0.
Jim,
I think, it is a good idea to a have a set of iterative alpha releases
gearing towards a final 1.0 release.
These are the features I see in the 1.0 final release ..
1. Full support for heterogeneous federation
2. Distributed assembly and deployment
3. Contribution mechanisms
4. Support
Jim,
I have been working on some of the stuff you have outlined below. Please see
comments inline.
Ta
Meeraj
From: Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: wire post processing and implementation vs. contract metadata
Date:
:40 -0800
On Feb 7, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Jim,
I have been looking at the work you have been doing with component
manager and URIs and figuring out how this would fit in with federated
deployment model I have been working on. Currently, the master creates
the physical
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Physical Component Defintion
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 20:13:10 -0800
On Feb 8, 2007, at 4:42 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Feb 8, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Also
Jim,
I have been looking at the work you have been doing with component manager
and URIs and figuring out how this would fit in with federated deployment
model I have been working on. Currently, the master creates the physical
component defintion to get the component running on the slave.
Thanks, I was thinking about adding that in :)
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r503232 - in
/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/kernel/spi/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/spi/model/physical:
./
Jeremy,
I have been working on the marshallers for the physical model, so that they
can be transported from master to slave runtimes in a federated model. I
think what you suggested is closely related to what I am working on. If I
understand you right,
1. The assembly service on the master
Hi,
The JPA stuff vcan definitely move to extensions, I can move it
tomorrow. The JXTA stuff is core runtime service, though, the actual
abstraction is in SPI. I am not sure whether it should stay in
runtime/services or move to extensions. My first inkling would be to
leave it in
this is more a core thing than say a WS extension? I guess i'd
assumed the discovery SPIs and any helpers etc would be in the kernel
and actual impls like JXTA would be an extension.
...ant
On 2/2/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
The JPA stuff vcan definitely move
Hi,
I have been working on the stuff around federated assembly and enabling
distributed SCA domains. Here is a quick summary of what has been done
so far,
Work in progress
* Discovery Service
* Provides the low-level communication abstraction for
enabling runtimes
Hi,
For the sake of similicity can we assume that allocation of components to
runtimes are explicitly specified in the SCDL, when it is made available to
the assembly service? Then the assembly service can matreilize the physical
component model for individual target slave runtimes, serialize
Hi,
Currently SCDL location is modelled as a URL in CompositeImplementation
class. This works ok as long as the SCDL is loaded from a URL. However, with
the stuff I am working on with federated assembly, an SCDL may be
transported into the runtime through the discovery mechanism and thw SCDL
will process the references
differently leading to inconsistent deployment across the federation.
--
Jeremy
On Jan 29, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Hi,
Currently SCDL location is modelled as a URL in CompositeImplementation
class. This works ok as long as the SCDL is loaded from
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Federated Deployment (was SCDL Location in Composite
Implementation)
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:17:21 -0800
On Jan 29, 2007, at 3:47 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Based
Jeremy,
Pls see questions below.
Thanks
Meeraj
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Federated Deployment (was SCDL Location in Composite
Implementation)
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:50:36 -0800
On Jan 29, 2007,
Raymond,
That was by mistake, I have reverted back to 469686.
Sorry for the trouble.
Meeraj
From: Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r500647 - in /incubator/tuscany/java:
pom/parent/pom.xml
Jeremy,
I have asked whether they plan to mavenize the 2.4 release. It doesn't
look like their immediate priority. I plan to volunteer to do that for
them if they agree.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 2:46 PM
Hi,
I have been looking at adding runtime id to RuntimeInfo. I think there
may be some scope for refactoring the current classes and interfaces
used for realising runtime info. The core abstraction is the RuntimeInfo
interface in host-api with a specialized interface StandaloneRuntimeInfo
in
+1
-Original Message-
From: Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:59 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Simon Laws for Tuscany committer
+1
ant elder wrote:
I'd like to nominate Simon Laws to become a Tuscany committer. Simon
has has
Hi,
Can I pull up profile name from StandaloneTuntimeInfo to RuntimeInfo?
Iwas thinking about using profile name as the peer name for runtime for
the distributed assembly I am working on. I would assume, regardless of
the host type, an SCA runtime should be able to participate in a
federated SCA
Hi,
How do we handle dependencies on artifacts that are not maintaiend in mvn
repos. I have a requirement to use the 2.4.1 release for jxta, however, they
don't maintain the artifacts in any repos.
One option I thought was to download it as part of the build and install it
to the local
toolkit and downloads it and installs it into the
local maven repo if it isn't there already. Have a look at
samples/sca/helloworldjsonrpc/pom.xml and build.xml to see how it
works.
-Bert
On 1/15/07, Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
How do we handle dependencies on artifacts
the JXTA folks to publish the latest versions into maven2
repo if possible :-)?
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message - From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 10:45 AM
Subject: non mvn artifacts
Hi,
How do we handle
I was getting an error getting the pom for jaxen.
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Build failure in tools
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:11:09 -0800
I'm getting a download failure in tools:
Reason: Error getting POM
Jeremy,
Based on the discussion we had earlier I have started putting the basic
shell around the domain physical model and discovery service.
1. Both physical model discovery and service interfaces are hosted in SPI.
2. Under services I have started on couple of implementations for the
Hi Raymond,
Sorry, that was committed by accident. I was using it only locally. I
will back the change out.
BTW it is a repo I use at work, which I have found quite reliable and
fast.
Ta
Meeraj
-Original Message-
From: Raymond Feng [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 14 January 2007
Monday 16:30 GMT is ok for me.
-Original Message-
From: ant elder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:16 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Continue having the Tuscany weekly IRC chat?
Just checking this for the new year as the chat has been a bit quiet
Hi,
For eclipse users using subclipse, soemone pointed out this new svn
plugin for eclipse (subversive,
http://www.polarion.org/index.php?page=overviewproject=subversive),
which has a lot more features including atomic checkins across projects.
Ta
Meeraj
Hi,
The first working version of the standalone server and management service
are checked in, with support for multiple profiles. The server is in module
server.start. The TuscanyServer class has the main method to start the
server. The server registers itself with an MBean server exposed to
Hi,
Is everyone able to run sourcecheck profile successfully. For me it is
failing unable to find the checkstyle and pmd plugins (it is looking for
version 2.2 snapshot). I can get it working only with adding
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/ in the plugin registry list in the parent pom
and
I agree.
However, in the runtime implementation there should be some way to pass
in contextual information into the management service instance. Mbean
server reference to the JmxManagementService for example. A dirty hack
would be to assume the constructor of all implementations would take a
Jeremy,
On having the system.scdl in the etc directory ..
I am assuming it is the system.scdl for the server itself, rather than
the runtime that is lauched by the server? Each runtime that is launched
through the startRuntime managed operation on the server will have its
own system.scdl,
k, that makes sense.
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 5:05 PM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Server profiles
On Jan 4, 2007, at 7:31 AM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Jeremy,
On having the system.scdl
Hi,
Is the eclipse code style template in etc up-to-date? I have configured my
workspace to use it. However, Jim mentioned some of the changes I recently
made in kernel screwed up the formatting.
Ta
Meeraj
_
Find Singles In
Hi,
This is a quick summary for the changes to enable management service within
composite components so that component registration can be relayed through
to the management service,
1. The runtime creates a management service and registers with the system
composite
2. The type of
what's breaking?
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message - From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Eclipse code style template
On Jan 4, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Hi,
Is the eclipse code
Raymond,
I will get the sourcecheck profile working and post the violations.
Ta
Meeraj
From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Eclipse code style template
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 07:47:43 +
Thanks Raymond
Francesco,
Most of the discussions on management and JMX are available on the
recent thread titled Standalone Server.
Here is a brief overview of what we have ..
Tuscany provides a standalone server in which one or more tuscany
runtimes can be started. The server itself used JMX for management.
ManagementService rather than hooking them to JMX directly.
--
Jeremy
On Dec 28, 2006, at 2:34 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Joel,
This is what I am thinking as well, maybe tuscany server is started as
part of a bootstrap runtime that includes the management service and it
is made available
Hi,
What I have done for the time being, is to use DynamicMBean and reflection
to expose any POJO as a managed bean. It is in
org.apache.tuscany.standalone.server.management.jmx.instrument.reflect.ReflectedDynamicMBean.
By default it excludes methods and properties on java.lang.Object. There
I am using it only for IoUtils.closeQuietly :) If you want, I can take it
off.
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r490620 -
/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/runtime/standalone/server.start/pom.xml
Date:
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Standalone server
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 09:43:12 -0800
On Dec 28, 2006, at 8:20 AM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Hi,
What I have done for the time being, is to use
Joel,
I think it would be fairly straightforward to write a generic JMX dynamic
MBean based on introspecting the annotated members (ops, properties etc),
quite similar to the reflection one already in the source tree. I think one
key question is would these annotations be specific to tuscany,
Joel,
This is what I am thinking as well, maybe tuscany server is started as part
of a bootstrap runtime that includes the management service and it is made
available to any other runtimes that is spawned there of.
Anyway, to start with I have added some stuff into core and spi
1 - 100 of 246 matches
Mail list logo
