On Feb 7, 2005, at 3:45 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Logically, every Web Service Stack needs a Container, but not every
EJBContainer needs a Web Service Stack.
I should state more clearly what I mean by this. CMP/BMP EntityBeans
or Stateful SessionBeans will not have a Web Service Stack, neither
Aaron Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 08/02/2005 06:36:39
AM:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
A DeploymentManager running disconnected from its J2EE
product can only configure modules but not perform administrative
operations.
It might not have access to any product
On Feb 7, 2005, at 3:45 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Just to clue people in on what has been implemented thus far:
We have an HTTP server that delegates to an listener that looks up
a WSContainer using URL and sends that input/output streams for
processing.
The WSContainer (the web service stack),
On Feb 7, 2005, at 4:15 PM, David Jencks wrote:
From another reply David wrote:
I should state more clearly what I mean by this. CMP/BMP EntityBeans
or Stateful SessionBeans will not have a Web Service Stack, neither
will Stateless SessionBeans that only have Local or Remote
interfaces.
In
Something very minor I noticed..
I'd like to change the format of the end of the following message, as it
sounded a bit weird to me:
18:53:26,449 INFO [Daemon] GBean
geronimo.server:J2EEApplication=null,J2EEModule=blah,J2EEServer=geronimo,j2eeType=GBean,name=blahblah
is not running in
For a while now I have been seeing these messages at startup:
18:53:26,433 INFO [Daemon] Alleged GBean
JMImplementation:type=MBeanServerInterceptorConfigurator is not a GBean
18:53:26,433 INFO [Daemon] Alleged GBean
JMImplementation:interceptor=contextclassloader is not a GBean
18:53:26,433
I talked about this with Alan and Dain a bit and they have some
additional points that I hopefully won't misrepresent too badly.
First of all everyone likes the first choice better, indicate the stuff
to leave out and use wildcards for.
Dain suggested including the type in the reference
These are mbeans from the internals of the mbean server that aren't
exposed as gbeans. I put in the annoying message for Dain's benefit so
he'd decide what to do about it. It doesn't signify a problem, but is
annoying.
thanks
david jencks
On Feb 7, 2005, at 5:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 7, 2005, at 5:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something very minor I noticed..
I'd like to change the format of the end of the following message, as
it
sounded a bit weird to me:
18:53:26,449 INFO [Daemon] GBean
geronimo.server:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 16:25:33 -0800, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been talking with David Blevins a bit about web services runtime
and deployment time architecture and am belatedly moving to the list.
I'm mostly thinking about ejb ws right now.
Goals: support both Jetty and
My picture for the EJB Ws are that the WS stack do the XML-java
conversion of the invocation and then hand java representatons over to
the EJB Continaer to do the invocation and return the result to WS
stack. [I know in thoery the Invocation object should be added to
the intercepter stack]. Then
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-570?page=history ]
John Sisson updated GERONIMO-570:
-
Attachment: patch.txt
Patch attached for review for
D:\Projects\J2EE\geronimo\modules\system\src\java\org\apache\geronimo\system\main\Daemon.java
Improve format of Gbean is not running message, issued at startup
-
Key: GERONIMO-570
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-570
Project: Apache Geronimo
Type: Improvement
Reporter: John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, if partially starting the server means that a EAR/WAR/CAR can't be
deployed remotely then I don't think that is practical as a user may want
to build and deploy the CAR from a GUI PC/workstation (possibly using a
GUI deployment tool) to a remote headless server.
Provide ability to start all non-started GBeans and see error messages as to
why they did not start
---
Key: GERONIMO-571
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-571
ARGH! Can we not send such large attachments??
Sanjiva.
- Original Message -
From: i386-redhat-linux-gnu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:09 AM
Subject: build failed Mon Feb 7 18:09:37 PST 2005
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 10:28:13AM +0600, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
ARGH! Can we not send such large attachments??
Absolutely. You could patch the scripts to publish to our website or something
and send a link instead. The key there would be another script that deleted
old entries to keep
Unfortunately, the message doesn't bother me. If you want to not
expose JMX objects via object name queries, I guess you'll have to move
the non-jmx objectname query code to the jmx gbean repo and use that
for all queries (David knows what I am talking about). As you can see,
I'm not too
I understand that this may not be important now, but so that others new to
the project (or the average Joe user) don't ask the same question,
wouldn't it make sense to record this as a JIRA issue, so it is flagged as
known and will be dealt with at a future date. Sound reasonable?
Thanks,
So, Guys,
I've given you a few days to look over the minimal kernel patch.
As I understood it we left the thread with two real options :
1) extend the kernel to allow acceptance of an existing object for
proxying via GBeanInstance, rather than always constructing such objects
itself.
2) submit
Because of recent JAXR work, we now have a dependency on Apache Scout.
It turns out that at the moment, scout is not publishing snapshots to
apache repo (and hence not to ibiblio), but I've brought this up w/ the
project, and they will.
I assume this means that everyone needs to get scout and
Mail client senior moment...
Begin forwarded message:
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: February 8, 2005 7:14:16 AM EST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: we now have a dep on Apache Scout
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Because of recent JAXR work, we now have a dependency on Apache Scout.
I think it should be on wiki under the section
Running. People should be warned about these
messages
and reassured that the server starts properly despite
these messages. I get lot of these while running
Tomcat.
Regards
Anita
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand that this may not be
http://cvs.apache.org/repository/scout/jars/
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 07:14:16 -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because of recent JAXR work, we now have a dependency on Apache Scout.
It turns out that at the moment, scout is not publishing snapshots to
apache repo (and hence not
On Feb 7, 2005, at 11:07 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand that this may not be important now, but so that others
new to
the project (or the average Joe user) don't ask the same question,
wouldn't it make sense to record this as a JIRA issue, so it is
flagged as
known and will be dealt
GBeanName instead of ObjectName
---
Key: GERONIMO-572
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-572
Project: Apache Geronimo
Type: New Feature
Components: kernel
Reporter: David Jencks
We may want to completely avoid
Before you address these, you should take a look at gbeans. We
automatically add 77 methods to all GBeans. I don't think we should be
removing stuff just because it came from 77. Instead, I think we
should determine if we want to do something more powerful or different,
but always keeping
I am definitely against this change. A fundamental assumption of the
current GBean code is it controls life-cycle, and I believe changing
this would have a massive impact on the entire GBean architecture. I
do believe that you could get it to work for your small use case, but I
believe that
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I am definitely against this change. A fundamental assumption of the
current GBean code is it controls life-cycle,
in GBeanInstance without my patch:
the 'target' field is typed 'Object', not GBeanLifecycle.
doStart() contains:
if (target instanceof
I'm going to agree with Jules on this - adding another layer of proxies
in here is not a particularly good idea nor is it something we know will
even work. If Spring has already supplied a CGLIB proxy, then we cannot
proxy it again directly. We will have to create a lot of workarounds for
this
Add optional maxTries and retryInterval attributes to deploy:waitForStarted
maven plugin
--
Key: GERONIMO-573
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-573
Project: Apache
I think Jules has a point on this. What about the use of other open
source projects that manage thier own private mbean lifecycles, such as
Tomcat?
A significant portion of the Tomcat underbelly infrastructure is managed
this way.
In the debugconsole, I can see the Tomcat created mbean
32 matches
Mail list logo
