Re: [DISCUSS] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

Joe Bohn wrote: It is not clear to me the purpose of the new assembly - geronimo-plugin-farm-node-2.2. Is this discussed someplace and will it be made available as an individual download on from our download page? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4284 It would be nice

[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-4980) Use Tomcat 7 in Geronimo 3.0

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4980?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12788589#action_12788589 ] Ivan commented on GERONIMO-4980: Commit first step changes to trunk At revision: 889135

Re: Move dependencyManagment segment in framework/pom.xml to the root pom.xml

On Dec 9, 2009, at 10:53 PM, Jarek Gawor wrote: I'm +1 for moving some shared dependencies into root pom. If some dependency is not shared then it can live in some plugin's root pom. To me it depends on how shared. Something like xmlbeans is used independently in a lot of builders. On

Re: [DISCUSS] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

On Dec 10, 2009, at 12:02 AM, frapien wrote: Joe Bohn wrote: It is not clear to me the purpose of the new assembly - geronimo-plugin-farm-node-2.2. Is this discussed someplace and will it be made available as an individual download on from our download page?

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 889128

Geronimo Revision: 889128 built with tests included See the full build-0300.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/build-0300.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/unit-test

[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-4982) ccpp (jsr 188) spec bundle

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4982?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12788610#action_12788610 ] David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-4982: initial implementation rev 889147.

Re: Some spec API changes while compiling Tomcat 7 with Geronimo Servlet/JSP API

OK, I am not familiar with the rules ;-( So only those changes done are compatible with the old versions, increased snapshot version could be used. Or even if it is a MR, we need to create a new code base for it. Right ? 2009/12/10 David Jencks david_jen...@yahoo.com This probably won't be

Re: [DISCUSS] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

It would be nice to have more infos on the Plugin based Farming http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC22/plugin-based-farming.html also in the RC the GShell deploy/farm command seems not available and documented gsh/ deploy/farm --help I think these were renamed deploy/cluster thanks david

Pluto 2 in geronimo

I have pluto 2 working in geronimo trunk, wired with blueprint. There are still a few exceptions on some console pages but they aren't related to pluto. portlet 2 depends on jsr 188 ccpp and pluto uses the sun spec jar to build against. My legal-fu is not up to deciphering whether we can

Re: [VOTE] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

I was sort of waiting for a decision on whether those couple of problems raised in the discuss thread were blockers or not. I guess they're not, so here's my +1 too. Rick Kevan Miller wrote: Here's my +1. I reviewed the source and binaries in

[BUILD] branches/2.2: Failed for Revision: 889245

Geronimo Revision: 889245 built with tests included See the full build-0800.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/2.2/20091210/build-0800.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/2.2/20091210/unit-test-reports

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 889265

Geronimo Revision: 889265 built with tests included See the full build-0900.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/build-0900.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/unit-test

Re: Some spec API changes while compiling Tomcat 7 with Geronimo Servlet/JSP API

Ivan wrote: Hi, While compiling Tomcat 7 with our own Servlet/JSP API, there are some errors about method signature changes. So far, I have no access to the new specs, if anyone could, please help to check it. javax.servlet.jsp.elExpressionEvaluator 1. The parameter expectedType

Re: Some spec API changes while compiling Tomcat 7 with Geronimo Servlet/JSP API

Where did you get the error about missing o.a.g.ext.tomcat:jasper:jar:7.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT , geronimo-tomcat-7.0.0.0 or plugins/tomcat ? 2009/12/10 Rick McGuire rick...@gmail.com Ivan wrote: Hi, While compiling Tomcat 7 with our own Servlet/JSP API, there are some errors about method

Let's keep trunk easy to build

Hey all, Let's keep (or try to) trunk easy to build. Whenever you make a change to some snapshot dependency please publish a new snapshot of it. That will make it easy for the next person to build the latest code. Jarek

Re: [VOTE] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

+1 from me. I built the server and then ran the full tck successfully. ~Jason Warner On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Rick McGuire rick...@gmail.com wrote: I was sort of waiting for a decision on whether those couple of problems raised in the discuss thread were blockers or not. I guess

Re: Let's keep trunk easy to build

On Dec 10, 2009, at 10:57 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Hey all, Let's keep (or try to) trunk easy to build. Whenever you make a change to some snapshot dependency please publish a new snapshot of it. That will make it easy for the next person to build the latest code. That's a good point. Would

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 889400

Geronimo Revision: 889400 built with tests included See the full build-1500.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/build-1500.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/unit-test

Re: Understanding the partial=true; mandatory:=partial trick

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Lin Sun linsun@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Do we have to use Require-Bundle here?  I would think Import-Package of packageX with the mandatory attribute should wire bundle 2 to bundle 1. Here's my understanding of your scenario: Bundle1:

Re: [VOTE] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

+1 I built the server from the source tar and was able to deploy and run my app (includes EJBs, JPA, messaging, JSPs). Jay David Jencks wrote: I've managed to come up with a 2nd 2.2 release candidate built using the maven-release-plugin. This includes Kevan;s fixes of source headers and a

Re: [VOTE] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

+1 Jason and I also ran the jaspic tck (which is separate from the javaee tck). After a little reconfiguration the servlet profile tests all pass. I'd like to call the vote soon, if you would like to vote please do so soon. thanks david jencks On Dec 10, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Jason Warner

Re: [VOTE] geronimo 2.2 release (2nd try)

+1 Ran Tomcat assembly on my Mac with JDK 1.6 and a couple small samples. -Donald David Jencks wrote: I've managed to come up with a 2nd 2.2 release candidate built using the maven-release-plugin. This includes Kevan;s fixes of source headers and a warning removal. See the jira issues

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 889487

Geronimo Revision: 889487 built with tests included See the full build-2100.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/build-2100.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20091210/unit-test

Help to apply patch to 2.1 branch for JIRA 3003

Looks like the patch for JIRA 3003 never made into the 2.1 branch. Could someone help to commit that code? Thanks a lot. -Jack

Re: Help to apply patch to 2.1 branch for JIRA 3003

I remebered that another patch should be committed at the same time, or there will be TCK issues, will check it later. 2009/12/11 Jack Cai greensi...@gmail.com Looks like the patch for JIRA 3003 never made into the 2.1 branch. Could someone help to commit that code? Thanks a lot. -Jack