Thanks for the pointers. I'll recheck my end.

Jon

On 20 Jul 2017 12:56 pm, "Svetlin Zarev" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Actually the inner static class Writer does not have a default constructor.
> This was introduced yesterday (commit 5830c209), so maybe it's not that
> critical.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2099
>
> 2017-07-20 14:45 GMT+03:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>:
>
> > looks like the class is not packaged in an arquillian war so it is not
> > instantiable. is that an option?
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> > rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory
> > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> >
> > 2017-07-20 13:42 GMT+02:00 Svetlin Zarev <svetlin.angelov.zarev@gmail.
> com
> > >:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The IvmContext arquillian test passes against current master: [1]
> > > The CXF tests fail because of no such method errors:
> > > java.lang.NoSuchMethodException:
> > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.rs.AppPropertiesPropagationTest$
> > > Writer.<init>()
> > > Maybe CXF was updated ?
> > >
> > > [1] https://gist.github.com/SvetlinZarev/
> 90d7deb0326e7b670440f0a9a442af
> > 1d
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Svetlin
> > >
> > > 2017-07-20 14:02 GMT+03:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > :
> > >
> > > > Happy to try it again, but here's the tests that were failing for me
> on
> > > > master:
> > > >
> > > > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.naming.IvmContextTest.
> > > > testListContextTree
> > > > org.apache.openejb.arquillian.tests.naming.IvmContextTest.
> > > > testContextListBindings
> > > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.rs.CustomProviderTest.customProvider
> > > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.rs.CustomProviderTest.
> > > customSpecificProvider
> > > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.rs.CustomProviderWithConfigTest.config
> > > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.rs.DiscoverCustomProviderTest.
> > > customProvider
> > > >
> > > > I haven't as yet dug into the root cause of the test failures. Will
> > > likely
> > > > be this evening before I can do that.
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks Svetlin - I'll review later today. I'm currently getting
> some
> > > > > IvmContextTest test failures on master - I'll send over a list.
> Happy
> > > to
> > > > > help fix these.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jon
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:19 AM, ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA) <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2102?page=com.
> > > > >> atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpane
> > > > >> l&focusedCommentId=16094340#comment-16094340 ]
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ASF GitHub Bot commented on TOMEE-2102:
> > > > >> ---------------------------------------
> > > > >>
> > > > >> GitHub user SvetlinZarev opened a pull request:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/94
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     TOMEE-2102: IvmContext bind/unbind creates duplicate contexts
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     $ git pull https://github.com/SvetlinZarev/tomee
> fixBindUndbind
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch
> > at:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/94.patch
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk
> > branch
> > > > >> with (at least) the following in the commit message:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     This closes #94
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ----
> > > > >> commit 12bf481e9bdbaec232c655abb63e1fd496d98fdd
> > > > >> Author: Svetlin Zarev <[email protected]>
> > > > >> Date:   2017-07-20T06:44:11Z
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     Add tests that verify the behaviour of IvmContext bind/unbind
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ----
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > IvmContext bind/unbind creates duplicate contexts
> > > > >> > -------------------------------------------------
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >                 Key: TOMEE-2102
> > > > >> >                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/
> > > jira/browse/TOMEE-2102
> > > > >> >             Project: TomEE
> > > > >> >          Issue Type: Bug
> > > > >> >            Reporter: Svetlin Zarev
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Imagine you have the flowing context "a/b/object". The context
> > tree
> > > > can
> > > > >> be created in two ways:
> > > > >> > 1. Relative to the root or some
> > > > >> > {code}
> > > > >> > IvmContext root = IvmContext.createRootContext();
> > > > >> > root.bind("a/b/object", new Object);
> > > > >> > {code}
> > > > >> > 2. Relative to some node:
> > > > >> > {code}
> > > > >> > IvmContext root = IvmContext.createRootContext();
> > > > >> > root.bind("a", null);
> > > > >> > IvmContext a = root.lookup("a");
> > > > >> > a.bind("b", null);
> > > > >> > IvmContext b = root.lookup("b")
> > > > >> > a.bind("object", new Object())
> > > > >> > {code}
> > > > >> > So when one looks up "object" or "a" or "b" or object, one has
> to
> > > get
> > > > >> the very same result regardless if the context tree was created
> by 1
> > > or
> > > > by
> > > > >> 2. Yet this is not the case when it comes to the IvmContext. Maybe
> > the
> > > > most
> > > > >> obvious (and shocking) issue is that IvmContext allows to bind 2
> > > > different
> > > > >> objects to the same name ! Example:
> > > > >> > {code}
> > > > >> >        IvmContext root = IvmContext.createRootContext();
> > > > >> >         root.bind("a/b/object", new Object());
> > > > >> >         IvmContext b = (IvmContext) root.lookup("a/b");
> > > > >> >         //already bound from root -> must fail, yet it does not
> > > > >> >         b.bind("object", new Object());
> > > > >> > {code}
> > > > >> > I've provided various test cases for different combinations of
> > > > >> bind/unbind/lookup that reproduce the issue.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
> > > > >> (v6.4.14#64029)
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to