Thanks 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: > well, then I start the release. at least all my tests doesnt show up > any problems... and this looks at least better than it was before... > I'll notify via this list once the release had been done > > kind regards, > Andreas > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com> > wrote: >> Yep, that should do it, at least that's the part I tested >> >> a long running test in the coming week will show how good :-) >> >> regards, Achim >> >> 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>> OK, this [1] should do it. WDYT? Out with it? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Andreas >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.wicket/commit/a2a103355e6c480864dcf1bd748b197fe695b0db >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Bram Pouwelse <b...@pouwelse.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Andreas, >>>> >>>> The fix seems to work, the only concern I have is that this may cause >>>> exceptions in a case where a custom property is set on the application >>>> in the application factory. This property would not be set by Pax >>>> Wicket when the "enhanced" version of the application is created. But >>>> even without the fix this would cause some unexpected behaviour. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Bram >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>>>> perfect! I just want to get a second feedback from Bram. If he also >>>>> confirms the trick working I'll commit and release PaxWicket 1.1.1 >>>>> tonight. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you very much for discovering and testing this one! >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> Andreas >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi Guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> I changed it according to the idea of Bram, >>>>>> and tested it with my application that was consuming far to much >>>>>> memory (reproducable). >>>>>> It's now stable below 300 MB of Heap. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Bram thanks for pointing to this, this really safed my day :-D >>>>>> >>>>>> regards, Achim >>>>>> >>>>>> 2012/10/23 Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>> Hi Andreas, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I did change this locally and I'm testing it right now. >>>>>>> Will give feedback later ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> regards, Achim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>> Well, I can commit your proposed changes, but you would still have to >>>>>>>> build >>>>>>>> pax wicket locally and use the snapshots. When you confirm that the >>>>>>>> problem >>>>>>>> I really fixed I can push a release to Central within a Max of 8 >>>>>>>> hours... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let me know of I can help you in any way. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kind regards, Andreas >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Oct 22, 2012 6:23 PM, "Bram Pouwelse" <b...@pouwelse.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Andreas, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've looked at the PropertyResolver at line 1447 a key is determined >>>>>>>>> to use in a ConcurrentHashMap [1]. This key is the application >>>>>>>>> returned by getApplication() after some testing I found out that >>>>>>>>> equals on application doesn't work by putting >>>>>>>>> getApplication().equals(getApplication()) in a sample application. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If I remove the special case for equals, hashCode and toString from >>>>>>>>> the intercept method [2] getApplication().equals(getApplication()) >>>>>>>>> returns true as I would expect. I've created a similar HashMap in my >>>>>>>>> test application and a map with Application as a key seems to work >>>>>>>>> after the change. Didn't have a chance to do any real world test with >>>>>>>>> this. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Bram >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/master/wicket-core/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/core/util/lang/PropertyResolver.java#L1447 >>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.wicket/blob/master/service/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/wicket/internal/PaxWicketApplicationFactory.java#L115 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2012/10/22 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>> > well, it's quite possible that the CG lib does some quircks here. >>>>>>>>> > Has >>>>>>>>> > anyone already tried to set breakpoints into the PropertyResolver >>>>>>>>> > [1] >>>>>>>>> > checking what's exactly the problem? I'll start tomorrow morning by >>>>>>>>> > doing exactly this... >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > If getApplication().equals(getApplication()) is really the problem >>>>>>>>> > (where did you find that code btw?) I might find a workaround for >>>>>>>>> > that >>>>>>>>> > case... let's see to nail down the problem first. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Kind regards, >>>>>>>>> > Andreas >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > [1] >>>>>>>>> > https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/master/wicket-core/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/core/util/lang/PropertyResolver.java >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Achim Nierbeck >>>>>>>>> > <bcanh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >> Oh, one more, >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> after running a Component Report i got the following info about it: >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Empty Collections >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Detected the following empty collections: >>>>>>>>> >> •6.482.518 instances of >>>>>>>>> >> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment >>>>>>>>> >> retain >= 829.762.448 bytes. >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Collection Fill Ratios >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Detected the following collections with fill ratios below 20%: >>>>>>>>> >> •432.156 instances of java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap >>>>>>>>> >> retain >= >>>>>>>>> >> 1.018.329.768 bytes. >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Map Collision Ratios >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Detected the following maps with collision ratios above 80%: >>>>>>>>> >> •1 instances of java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap retain >>>>>>>>> >> 1.038.046.920 bytes. >>>>>>>>> >> •1 instances of java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment >>>>>>>>> >> retain >>>>>>>>> >> 296 bytes. >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> I haven't found the root cause of it, but somehow I have the >>>>>>>>> >> impression this might be an issue of Pax-Wicket? >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> btw. I'm using Pax-Wicket in Version 1.0.2 >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> regards, Achim >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> 2012/10/22 Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>>>> >>> Here a little update to this, cause today my application did run >>>>>>>>> >>> into >>>>>>>>> >>> an OOM due to this (with 1GB Heap) >>>>>>>>> >>> The current HeapDump shows me >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> That the wicket PropertyResolver uses about 1GB Ram, from those >>>>>>>>> >>> are >>>>>>>>> >>> about 62MB for >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>> ref >>>>>>>>> >>> |CGLIB$CALLBACK_0|org.ops4j.pax.wicket.internal.PaxWicketApplicationFactory$WebApplicationWrapper >>>>>>>>> >>> @ 0xf2b693d0 >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> I guess those are basically the session, looks OK right now. >>>>>>>>> >>> But the rest is consumed by about 260000 ConcurrentHashMap >>>>>>>>> >>> Entries. >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> For example: >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> Type|Name |Value >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>> ref >>>>>>>>> >>> |CGLIB$CALLBACK_0|org.ops4j.pax.wicket.internal.PaxWicketApplicationFactory$WebApplicationWrapper >>>>>>>>> >>> @ 0xc1fa0250 >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> I don't know how to say this, but it seems awfully wrong right >>>>>>>>> >>> now ... >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> regards, Achim >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> 2012/10/22 Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>>>> >>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> I've seen the exact thing but didn't have the time (yet) to get a >>>>>>>>> >>>> hold of it. >>>>>>>>> >>>> But since it's mostly Wicket classes involved I had the >>>>>>>>> >>>> impression >>>>>>>>> >>>> it's wicket itself >>>>>>>>> >>>> that does this. >>>>>>>>> >>>> To prove something like it, I wanted to create an example which >>>>>>>>> >>>> would >>>>>>>>> >>>> work >>>>>>>>> >>>> in both world (pax-wicket and wicket) but due to lack of time I >>>>>>>>> >>>> wasn't able to >>>>>>>>> >>>> get to it. >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> But since I'm not the only one I'd guess this is something >>>>>>>>> >>>> worthy to >>>>>>>>> >>>> investigate :) >>>>>>>>> >>>> My next test would have been to switch to Wicket 6 (pax-wicket >>>>>>>>> >>>> 2.0) >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> regards, Achim >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> 2012/10/22 Bram Pouwelse <b...@pouwelse.com>: >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> I'm working on an application that's using Pax Wicket (version >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 1.1.0). >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Because the application is using more memory than expected I'm >>>>>>>>> >>>>> running >>>>>>>>> >>>>> some tests and analysing heap dumps for a few days now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> While analysing the heap of my "weekend test" I've found this >>>>>>>>> >>>>> at the >>>>>>>>> >>>>> top of the Pax Wicket bundle class loader at the top of the >>>>>>>>> >>>>> dominator >>>>>>>>> >>>>> tree, seems to me that the PropertyResolver is creating new >>>>>>>>> >>>>> DefaultClassCache instances all the time but I don't understand >>>>>>>>> >>>>> why. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Below I've pasted a few selections from Eclipse Memory Analyzer: >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Dominator tree: >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Class Name >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | Shallow Heap | Retained >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Heap | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Percentage >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> org.apache.felix.framework.BundleWiringImpl$BundleClassLoaderJava5 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xc123ee58 | 88 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,602,288 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 89.39% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |- java.util.Vector @ 0xc1252208 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,566,800 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 89.38% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | '- java.lang.Object[1280] @ 0xc2445ee8 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 5,136 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,566,768 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 89.38% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | |- class org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xb9b5d330 | 32 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,420,472 | 89.36% * >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | '- java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap @ 0xc2962bf8 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 48 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,420,440 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 89.36% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | '- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment[16] @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xc2962c28 | 80 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,420,392 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 89.36% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | |- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xc2963098 | 40 | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 643,418,872 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 89.36% ** >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | |- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry[262144] @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xd8674190 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 1,048,592 | 643,418,768 | 89.36% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | '- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea9687a8 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 642,370,176 | 89.22% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | |- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea967a28 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 642,366,720 | 89.22% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | | |- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea966ca8 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 642,363,264 | 89.22% *** >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | | |- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver$DefaultClassCache @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea967398| 16 | 3,424 | 0.00% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | | '- Total: 2 entries >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | |- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver$DefaultClassCache @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea968118 | 16 | 3,424 | 0.00% >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | '- Total: 2 entries >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> | >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> * class org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xb9b5d330 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> [statics]: >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Type|Name |Value >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |SET |set >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |IS |is >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |GET |get >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |applicationToClassesToGetAndSetters|java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap >>>>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xc2962bf8 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |RESOLVE_CLASS |2 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |CREATE_NEW_VALUE |1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |RETURN_NULL |0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |log >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |org.ops4j.pax.logging.slf4j.Slf4jLogger @ 0xc2972ba0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ** java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry[262144] @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xd8674190 [attributes] >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Type |Name |Value >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> float|loadFactor|0.75 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |table >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry[262144] @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xd8674190 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |threshold |196608 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |modCount |185871 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |count |185871 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |sync >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync >>>>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xc29630c0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> *** java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea966ca8 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> [attributes] >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Type|Name |Value >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |next |java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea965f28 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |value|org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver$DefaultClassCache >>>>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xea966618 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> int |hash |1234246985 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ref |key >>>>>>>>> >>>>> |nl.ditp.fabuland.core.internal.WicketApplication$$EnhancerByCGLIB$$4188d86a >>>>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xc22bcc88 >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Is this caused by a coding error in the application or a bug in >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Wicket >>>>>>>>> >>>>> / Pax Wicket? >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Bram Pouwelse >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> >>>>> general mailing list >>>>>>>>> >>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>>>> >>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>>>> >>>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>>>> >>>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & >>>>>>>>> >>>> Project >>>>>>>>> >>>> Lead >>>>>>>>> >>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>>>> >>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>>>> >>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>>>> >>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>>>> >>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & >>>>>>>>> >>> Project >>>>>>>>> >>> Lead >>>>>>>>> >>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>>>> >> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>>>> >> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>>>> >> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>>>> >> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & >>>>>>>>> >> Project >>>>>>>>> >> Lead >>>>>>>>> >> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> >> general mailing list >>>>>>>>> >> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>>>> >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> > general mailing list >>>>>>>>> > general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>>>> > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> general mailing list >>>>>>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> general mailing list >>>>>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project >>>>>>> Lead >>>>>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project >>>>>> Lead >>>>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> general mailing list >>>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> general mailing list >>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> general mailing list >>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> general mailing list >>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >> Committer & Project Lead >> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project >> Lead >> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> general mailing list >> general@lists.ops4j.org >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > general@lists.ops4j.org > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
_______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.ops4j.org http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
