David,
I agree that it is not confusing to allow a plan to override context
path in application.xml
Generally speaking, I think it is valuable to have override mechanisms
for much of the configuration in the deployment bundles. This
goes for context path in application.xml and things like init
All,I'm new to this mailling list subscription. Basically looking into how can I contribute to this project. Interested in coding or bugs fixing. Please advise. Thanks!Regds, Yoon TeikMatt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All,I have updated the 1.0 branch with 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT as well as
OK, Folks - here is how I see it -
Everyone knows that they are right and the other guy is wrong.
Result - DEADLOCK - everyone loses.
Solution - release locks, back off, coordinate, retry.
Releasing locks involves us all making concessions :
I suggest -
Jan, Greg and I conceded that Jeff
David,
I'm ecstatic! Those dependency changes have solved my problems and I
finally have a build.
Thanks heaps!
Jan
David Jencks wrote:
There were definitely some missing dependencies that explain the
possibility of the first problem you encountered. I'm still confused
by the second one.
Jules Gosnell wrote:
I suggest -
Jan, Greg and I conceded that Jeff could have been more involved in
discussion before this change went in.
+1
We all agree to overlook all current technical differences.
I don't think overlook is the right word. Continue discussing
would be better. See
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1470?page=comments#action_12362730
]
Karl Avedal commented on GERONIMO-1470:
---
I was the one pointing this out on IRC, and I'd like to clarify my thoughts a
little.
The JavaEE specification lays out a
Connector dependencies
--
Key: GERONIMO-1471
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1471
Project: Geronimo
Type: Improvement
Components: Clustering, connector, Tomcat, web
Environment: Deploying a web application in a cluster.
Hi,
I played arround with geronimo 1.0 / Jetty 5.1.9 on Windows platform and
found two vulnerabilities:
The first one is a classical cross-site scripting in the
jsp-examples:
http://10.10.10.10:8080/jsp-examples/cal/cal2.jsp?time=/scriptalert('Gotcha')/script
The second one is a persistant
+1. This is really great stuff.
Jeff
Jules Gosnell wrote:
OK, Folks - here is how I see it -
Everyone knows that they are right and the other guy is wrong.
Result - DEADLOCK - everyone loses.
Solution - release locks, back off, coordinate, retry.
Releasing locks involves us all
Here are a couple of simple suggestions for moving this discussion forward:
1) Please make sure to have as many discussions as possible in public
on the dev@ mailing list and make sure to summarize offline
discussions as soon as possible after they have occurred.
2) Please create JIRA issues
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1453?page=all ]
Kristian Koehler updated GERONIMO-1453:
---
Component: core
Version: 1.0
updated the affected version
GBeanOverride throws NullPointerException when more than one reference
On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:18 AM, Jian Liao wrote:Hi all,I am working on integration Jetspeed 2 with Geronimo(Tomcat container). I have the following configuration in my j2 main web.xml.- security-constraint- web-resource-collection web-resource-nameLogin /web-resource-name
+1
On Jan 14, 2006, at 4:46 AM, Jules Gosnell wrote:
OK, Folks - here is how I see it -
Everyone knows that they are right and the other guy is wrong.
Result - DEADLOCK - everyone loses.
Solution - release locks, back off, coordinate, retry.
Releasing locks involves us all making
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1455?page=all ]
Donald Woods updated GERONIMO-1455:
---
Component: kernel
(was: console)
Summary: Start of CAR does not load and start its GBeans (was: System
Modules portlet
Reversion all plugins and feature to 1.0.0
--
Key: GERONIMODEVTOOLS-47
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-47
Project: Geronimo-Devtools
Type: Bug
Components: eclipse-plugin
Reporter: Sachin
My comments inline...
Greg Wilkins wrote:
Jules Gosnell wrote:
I suggest -
Jan, Greg and I conceded that Jeff could have been more involved in
discussion before this change went in.
+1
We all agree to overlook all current technical differences.
I don't think overlook is the right
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1130?page=comments#action_12362749
]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1130:
Can this please be considered for 1.0.1 or must it wait until 1.1? The patch
is already a month old now.
Implement WebServer
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1194?page=comments#action_12362751
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1194:
Applied with some modifications to config.xml to head. See next comment as
well.
Sending
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1194?page=comments#action_12362752
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1194:
The installer partly works for me. Here are some remaining problems:
1. It is not clear what the copyright statement on
In order to make the izpack installer work for us we need a bunch of
modified/extended copies of the izpack files: these are currently in
modules/installer-support. Should these have the original text from
the izpack files (this is what is in svn at the moment) or should we
replace this
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1447?page=all ]
David Jencks reassigned GERONIMO-1447:
--
Assign To: David Jencks
MagicGBall sample does not work in AG 1.0
-
Key: GERONIMO-1447
packaging plugin creates client cars with wrong version
---
Key: GERONIMO-1472
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1472
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Versions: 1.0.1, 1.1
Reporter: David
ApplicationPolicyConfigurationManager doesn't clear permissions on startup
--
Key: GERONIMO-1473
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1473
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Components:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1447?page=comments#action_12362757
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1447:
what an embarrassing oversight. Patch applied to head:
Sendingconfigs/client-corba/project.properties
Sending
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1447?page=all ]
David Jencks closed GERONIMO-1447:
--
Fix Version: 1.1
Resolution: Fixed
Applied patch to 1.0.1. I didn't check that magic gball runs, if there are
still problems please reopen.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1466?page=all ]
David Jencks reopened GERONIMO-1466:
It's not complete. Daytrader is missing as a separate project, and its version
should be 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT IMO. openejb has to be updated to
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1466?page=comments#action_12362760
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1466:
Update openejb to 2.0.1, and use it in geronimo;
Sendingetc/project.properties
Transmitting file data .
Committed
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1194?page=comments#action_12362761
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1194:
Merged with slight modifications to use parameterized release notes version to
1.0 branch:
Sending
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1457?page=comments#action_12362769
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1457:
Another one
Sendingmodules/deploy-jsr88/src/conf/manifest.mf
Transmitting file data .
Committed revision 369165.
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1466?page=comments#action_12362770
]
Alan Cabrera commented on GERONIMO-1466:
When we update the versions of these projects, what bug are we actually fixing
for this bug release? Should not these
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1466?page=all ]
Alan Cabrera reassigned GERONIMO-1466:
--
Assign To: David Jencks (was: Matt Hogstrom)
Question intended for David.
Preparing 1.0 branch for development of 1.0.1
On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:11 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
I have updated the 1.0 branch with 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT as well as
removed dayTrader from the main build. At this point it builds on
my system :)
Please take a minute to update and see if I missed anything.
Can you get daytrader
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1455?page=comments#action_12362773
]
Donald Woods commented on GERONIMO-1455:
Seems that this may be related to the new load=false attribute support.
Looking at the following file -
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006, David Jencks wrote:
What would the reaction be to something
that only sort of works in an official release?
IMHO all features all features in a production release should be usable.
It's not a problem if the functionality is limited, as long as it works.
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, James Strachan wrote:
The infiniband transport would be native code, so you could use JNI.
However, it would definitely be worth it.
Agreed! I'd *love* a Java API to Infiniband! Have wanted one for ages
google every once in a while to see if one shows up :)
It
I've seen several posts about the upcoming 1.0.x release and 1.1 and 2.0 etc.
lately and I think its great that we're having these discussions.
I'd like to use this thread to aggregate people's thoughts about this topic in a
single thread for reference and clarification as we make forward
To me the only important requirements in release numbers are that they
should tell the user:
1. Whether the release is backward compatible.
2. Whether it's a stable build vs. unstable.
I would rather not to have to learn the various meanings of digits 1-N. It
seems like it would make it more
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, James Strachan wrote:
The infiniband transport would be native code, so you could use JNI.
However, it would definitely be worth it.
Agreed! I'd *love* a Java API to Infiniband! Have wanted one for ages
google every once in a while to see if one shows up :)
It
38 matches
Mail list logo
