On 3/27/08, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure I'm getting the multi-threading thing, could you say a bit
more about it?
--
Jean-Sebastien
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread 1 and thread 2 call ContributionService.contribute. Each
contribution contains a
Hi All, I am new to Tuscany Community, being interested in contributing and
trying to catch up. Right now am going through the code to get a feel of it
and the threading issue (as mentioned in
http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg29138.html) seems
to be something simple that
Hi,
An issue that's mentioned in JIRA (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2092) seems to be something of
my interest and i would like to have this JIRA assigned to myself and
provide a fix. Noticed that i do have enough rights to assign a JIRA to my
ID=ramkumar.rj. Can anyone help me
Hi All,
Looking at the history of JIRA's (2170, 2085, 2092) raised due to
ConcurrentModificationException, its evident that our runtime would throw
more such exceptions in the coming days, such problem occurs if two threads
try to add a contribution simultaneously. Also the above mentioned JIRA's
Thanks Simon, for your recommendation on synchronizing the access to
loadListeners() method for TUSCANY-2192, i agree with you and have reopened
the JIRA to apply the fix.
Thanks Raymond and Scott for your inputs on this regard. For the scenario
explained by Scott it looks like synchronizing the
Congrats, Wang Feng!!
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
Hi,
By working on TUSCANY-1881, i am just tyring to fix the issue for producing
better exception message for those methods with @OneWay annotations, when
these method does not have void return type. As mentioned in the specs
Any method that returns void and has no declared exceptions may be
Sorry for mentioning TUSCANY-1881.. the actual JIRA is TUSCANY-1867.
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
Hi Simon,
I am also facing this issue, here Raymond have used ConcurrentHashMap to
resolve the issue as mentioned in TUSCANY-2069, but we can't be using
ConcurrentHashMap in this case as this collection (ConcurrentHashMap) does
not allow null value to be inserted in the Map. Since the
TUSCANY 1881, talks about throwing a warning msg when adding remote bindings
to services with interfaces not marked as remotable, by which the data
transformation might get messed up.
From the current implementation, I understand that the datatransformation
interceptor will not be inserted in the
On 4/18/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TUSCANY 1881, talks about throwing a warning msg when adding remote
bindings
to services with interfaces not marked as remotable, by which the data
transformation might
org.apache.tuscany.sca.node.NodeException:
org.apache.tuscany.sca.interfacedef.InvalidOperationException: Method should
not declare exceptions with an @OneWay annotation.
at
org.apache.tuscany.sca.node.impl.SCANodeImpl.init(SCANodeImpl.java:222)
at
On 4/22/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
org.apache.tuscany.sca.node.NodeException:
org.apache.tuscany.sca.interfacedef.InvalidOperationException: Method should
not declare exceptions with an @OneWay annotation.
at
org.apache.tuscany.sca.node.impl.SCANodeImpl.init
On 4/18/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/18/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
TUSCANY 1881, talks about throwing a warning msg when adding remote
bindings
to services with interfaces not marked
Lets say we have a component A in composite C1, which needs a reference to a
remotable service exposed with default binding (i.e., binding.sca) in
component B under composite C2. In such scenario how should i configure the
(binding) reference in composite C1?
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar
On 4/23/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 4/18/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/18/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 4/26/08, Mike Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luciano Resende wrote:
The Tuscany PPMC and Incubator PMC have voted for Mario Antollini to
become a Tuscany committer.
Please spend sometime to get familiar with Apache developer's pages
[1], the Apache Incubator site [2] and to the
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 4/29/08, Wang Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 from me too.
Thanks,
Wang Feng
On 2008-04-29 02:16:50,ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've done a lot of work since last October. We now have a diverse
community
of contributors and have demonstrated the ability to attract new
am not sure about any exceptions that are thrown.
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
On 4/29/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
OR CompositeActivatorImpl.
Hope this would help. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks.
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
On 4/29/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
Thanks for your detailed comments, that gives a clear picture. I have now
opened a JIRA (TUSCANY-2277
+1 from me.
On 5/12/08, Rajini Sivaram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
On 5/10/08, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Restarting the graduation vote with the updated proposal words, please
vote
on the proposal below to graduate Tuscany to a TLP.
+1 from me.
...ant
X.
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
a control over the monitor. OR
2. Allow the domain creation to complete, irrespective of any user-errors
that are encountered during validation.
Like to know your thoughts on this. Thanks.
On 5/13/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patches for TUSCANY-2277 are now available with the following
Thanks Simon, itests for these validation messages are now available with
TUSCANY-2329.
On 5/19/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just checked in Ram's patch to convert validation messages (i.e. those
messages indicating that the user have provided invalid input of some form)
to
doing an investigation on the
same to provide a fix.
On 5/21/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thanks Simon, itests for these validation
For an itest to validation messages, i was trying to recreate the exception
messages from implementation.spring module reported by
SpringImplementationProcessor.java code. Here is the piece of code from the
resolve method.
/* Load the Spring component type by reading the Spring application
For creating an itests for the validation messages, it was a requirement to
create a subset of tuscany runtime to read contribution metadata, analyze
and resolve contribution dependencies. To achieve this i just took the code
from sample-domain-management to create a CustomDomainBuilder [source:
) XMLStreamException
c) PriviledegedActionException
d) and ParseConfigurationExceptions
For the above said exceptions, we need some discussion as how to handle
them.
I have now raised TUSCANY-2347 to address this issue by leaving the above
exceptions to still throw.
On 5/26/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
For creating an itests for the validation messages, it was a requirement to
reproduce all kind of exceptions thrown from various processors in the
runtime. I came across this issue of unreachable code in the policy
processors (especially in PolicyIntentProcessor.java and
PolicySetProcessor.java).
Hi Mike,
Thanks for raising this, I believe we need more detailed discussion on this
topic with the community and its important that we all agree upon. Simon has
started a new thread in the ML to discuss about this and here is the link to
same...
. Please let me know if any one
has thoughts on this.
Any comments/suggestions would help to improve the way we are trying to
handle this. Thanks.
On 5/29/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Simon,
After introducing
Not able to find an xsd for implementation.das and
implementation.data.xml module from assembly-xsd/src/main/resources folder.
Not sure if there is any reason why we don't have an xsd for these?
Can anyone guide me on this? Thanks.
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
After doing a complete debug of the code, realized that this seems to be an
issue and we need a fix here.
I will be opening a JIRA to fix this.
On 5/29/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For creating an itests for the validation messages, it was a requirement to
reproduce all kind
I have opened TUSCANY-2354 to fix this issue.
On 5/30/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After doing a complete debug of the code, realized that this seems to be an
issue and we need a fix here.
I will be opening a JIRA to fix this.
On 5/29/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Hi Simon,
After downloading the complete latest code from the repository, i noticed
that the reason for the failure in CouldNotResolveLocation for
implementation.resource and implementation.widget validation is due to the
missed code while applying the patch.
The changes suggested in the patch
/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not able to find an xsd for implementation.das and
implementation.data.xml module from assembly-xsd/src/main/resources folder.
Not sure if there is any reason why we don't have an xsd for these?
Can anyone guide me on this? Thanks.
--
Thanks Regards
Hi Simon,
I have provided the fix with TUSCANY-2362 for the same.
For Junit4, let me have a look and provide the changes accordingly.
On 6/2/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
After downloading
Thanks Luciano, you can count on me if i can help in creating one with your
guidance.
On 6/2/08, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We would have to create one. Let me try to help you and see if I can
get one available soon.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 3:26 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED
a
quick look as I was having issues trying to get a sucessful run of the
validation iTest bucket, but I guess it's due to different issues.
Thanks
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 3:18 AM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi
Congrats Vamsi!.
On 6/3/08, Vamsavardhana Reddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Ant,
Forgot to mention in my previous note... I accept Tuscany PMC's invitation
to me to become a committer :)
I already have a signed ICLA in place. My JIRA userid is vamsic. My
Apache
userid is vamsic007.
On 6/3/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do we define the processor code? Here are a couple of examples.
From stax artifact processor.
M read(XMLStreamReader reader) throws ContributionReadException,
XMLStreamException;
From composite builder
void build(Composite composite)
Hi Ant,
This testcase fails due to an issue that we faced while applying the patch.
FYI... This issue is also discussed in the below thread.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200806.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Hope to get this resolved soon.
On 6/4/08, ant elder [EMAIL
Hi Hasan,
The ideal place to catch these exceptions seems to be in the
ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor read method, i think it would not be
possible to categorize the exception based on implementation and binding at
this stage.
I believe it would be possible to throw a generic exception saying
Hi Sebastien,
One thing that comes to my mind is about the JavaRuntimeModuleActivator that
also needs some modularization as we were discussing upon them some time
back.
For your reference:
On 5/29/08, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JavRuntimeModuleActivator is responsible for
--
From: Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 4:37 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor should register error when
unsupported implementation or binding types are found
Hi Hasan
On 6/5/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here the processor would never throw ContributionReadException, when the
exceptions are blocked as most of the ContributionReadException are of
type1, 2 or 3.
Do you mean type 2, 3 4 here. I still expect us to throw type 1
exceptions.
thoughts on it. Thanks.
On 6/6/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/5/08, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here the processor would never throw ContributionReadException, when the
exceptions are blocked as most of the ContributionReadException are of
type1, 2 or 3.
Do you
I am seeing JUnit test failures in modules/implementation/osgi. Is anyone
else also noticing the same?
Using default configuration properties.
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 1.432 sec
FAILURE!
Congrats Scott !
--
Thanks Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
After disabling most of the exceptions, now i face a problem in the itest
validations as we generally check for the last reported problem to verify
the results. Now due to disabled exception the processing continues
furthur
and more problems
Please ignore the above said issue... this worked. Was my mistake with my
local respository.
But I face a OutofMemory exception with itest/osgi-implementation, for which
i like to post it in a seperate thread.
On 6/9/08, Ramkumar R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am seeing JUnit test failures
I see a OutOfMemoryError in itest/osgi-implementation conversation
testcases, and a serious of testcases fails with the following exception.
Can anyone help me in identifying the issue here. Thanks.
As explained in my previous post, after introducing a fix as shown below
Intent resolvedRequiredIntent = resolver.resolveModel(Intent.class,
requiredIntent);
if (!resolvedRequiredIntent.isUnresolved()) {
requiredIntents.add(resolvedRequiredIntent);
for the unreachable code, noticed that not
Here is the brief summary on the monitor extensions, please review the same
and post your comments and suggestions on the same. This would help us for
the documentation.
**
*Need for Monitor Extension:*
**The need for monitor extension came as a requirement, to have a customized
exception handling
55 matches
Mail list logo
