Yes. You are right. The patch didn't contain the deletion.

Raymond Feng
Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 13, 2011, at 11:48 PM, Antonio Sanso <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Raymond,
> 
> the error that Tommaso probably refers to are contained in the 
> org.apache.amber.oauth2.integration.AccessTokenAssertion.
> This class still contains some reference to the no more existing 
> GrantType.ASSERTION.
> If I am not mistaken though this class should not be there anymore in the 
> first place (and probably is not anymore in your workspace, that is why you 
> do not see any error).
> 
> Just a guess
> 
> Regards
> 
> Antonio
> 
> 
> On Dec 14, 2011, at 12:09 AM, Raymond Feng wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm not seeing test failures in my local build. Please let me know what 
> errors you ran into.
> 
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> ________________________________________________________________
> Raymond Feng
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> Apache Software Foundation Member
> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> ________________________________________________________________
> 
> On Dec 13, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
> 
> Hello Antonio,
> 
> I intended to commit it some days ago but it looked like there were some
> integration tests failing due to it.
> Since I wanted to double check it I postponed it a little, I am travelling
> these days so I'll probably be able to review it in the first days of the
> next week, if anyone of the committers is willing to do it before feel free
> :)
> Cheers,
> Tommaso
> 
> 2011/12/13 Antonio Sanso <[email protected]>
> 
> Hello Amber committers,
> 
> I was wondering if any of the committer might take some action regarding
> AMBER 42. I must highlight is not my patch and that there is not any
> intention from my side to push/rush anything :)
> The main reason that made me write this mail is the size of the patch
> itself. While it is a really good patch (thanks Raymond for it) it is a
> pretty big one.
> If somebody with write SVN commit would review and apply it, it would be
> really good (I have already put my non binding +1 after reviewing it ) .
> This would allow other people to do new patches in an easier way without
> overlapping with any of the several files included in the AMBER-42 patch.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Antonio
> 
> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMBER-42
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to