Wow, the screenshots on that issue look about perfect. Is this
something you'd want to hack on?
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
Maybe the code provided in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3811
can be used as a starting point?
-Donald
David
This should be fine. Trying to figure out what is not happening that
should be happening.
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
It would seem this change: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=698750
precipitated these failures. I started to notice the failures
Think I got this cleared up. Doing a full build now.
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:27 PM, David Blevins wrote:
This should be fine. Trying to figure out what is not happening
that should be happening.
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
It would seem this change: http
So I improved the EJB integration so that there's a gbean for each
container type and the exact attributes for each container are
strongly typed gbean attributes.
Is it possible we can get someone to create a portlet that shows each
ejb container in the system and allows people to edit the
On Sep 18, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Jay D. McHugh wrote:
I would like to be involved too.
But, I don't have any experience with either AntHill or Hudson.
Has anyone used Continuum? Would that be harder/easier to configure
and
use than the other two?
The first version of GBuild ran a mashup of
Didn't see them documented anywhere so I threw up a basic doc using
Gianny's commit info and a few code examples. Might be a doc in
another space I didn't notice.
http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV/gbean-annotations.html
Feel free to expand upon it.
-David
I've added some functionality to OpenEJB trunk which has been enabled
in Geronimo trunk. Here's an overview of how it works:
DISCOVERY
What we have going on from a tech perspective is each server sends and
receives a multicast heartbeat. Each multicast packet contains a
single URI that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12628692#action_12628692
]
David Blevins commented on GERONIMO-4237:
-
That would explain why this didn't
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
David Blevins reassigned GERONIMO-4237:
---
Assignee: Manu T George (was: David Blevins)
Elements jndi-name, jndi-local
On Sep 3, 2008, at 3:50 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Sep 3, 2008, at 12:28 PM, Ted Kirby wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:37 PM, David Jencks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 3, 2008, at 11:17 AM, Ted Kirby wrote:
I opened JIRA (GERONIMO-4276) openejb-jar-2.2.xsd missing from the
schema
On Aug 19, 2008, at 6:35 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Also, on 4/18 David Blevins added this comment in the thread:
I definitely think our website should remain restricted to
committers. I sort of see that as separate from the rest of our
spaces.
I vaguely recall there was a desire to paint all
Issue Type: Bug
Security Level: public (Regular issues)
Components: naming, OpenEJB
Affects Versions: 2.1.2, 2.1.1, 2.1, 2.0.2, 2.0.1, 2.0
Reporter: David Blevins
Assignee: David Blevins
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You
On Aug 6, 2008, at 8:36 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Aug 4, 2008, at 4:49 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 2:06 AM, Kevan Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
B) A maven build will access multiple, redundant, versions of the
same
artifact. We control the versions that will be
On Aug 4, 2008, at 2:19 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
We could add the note in the version that we post to the wiki.
That seems good enough to me.
For future release notes, we might want to add a link at the top to
the online release notes with some look here for updated information
type text.
+1
David
On Jul 30, 2008, at 7:52 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
All,
I've prepared a release candidate of Geronimo Server 2.1.2 for your
review and vote.
The source for the Geronimo Server 2.1.2 release currently resides
here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/branches/2.1.2
When
On Jul 31, 2008, at 12:20 AM, David Jencks wrote:
My impression based on gossip is that while it's possible to copy an
entire wiki space it isn't possible to move individual pages between
spaces. Is this correct?
On Jul 31, 2008, at 3:38 PM, David Jencks wrote:
3. Create a new space
zeros wrote:
Thanks a lot. It was the solution. In the documentation which I have, the
local and remote interfaces are shown by remote/remote and
local/local, but substituing those by
business-local/business-local and business-remote/business-remote
it works perfectly.
With tags i
On Jun 24, 2008, at 12:32 PM, dnsunil wrote:
When accessing a remote EJB running on Websphere CE environment from a
standalone client on Windows 2003 server throwing the below exception
Unknown Container Exception: java.rmi.RemoteException: Cannot read the
response from the server (OEJP/2.0)
On Jul 16, 2008, at 3:39 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
I just committed this change. It doesn't look like this is
causing any tck issues.
Guessing a lot of those places you added the 3.1 api were more or
less just
On Jul 16, 2008, at 10:43 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 16, 2008, at 3:39 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
I just committed this change. It doesn't look like this is
causing any tck issues.
Guessing a lot of those
use the new ejb 3.1 API (thinking of the test suite and
mejb).
-David
Joe Bohn wrote:
Rick McGuire wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 10, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
If I build Geronimo trunk using the latest OpenEjb snapshots
(published around 6/27-28) things build fine
On Jul 10, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
If I build Geronimo trunk using the latest OpenEjb snapshots
(published around 6/27-28) things build fine. However, if I grab
OpenEjb trunk and build it locally (to get the latest image) I get
build failures (NoClassDefFoundError) in the
this if we make a quick
check for the annotation ourselves. We could probably make our own
copy of @java.beans.ConstructorProperties and put it in a new spec jar
for java 5 usage.
-David
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 5:22 PM, David Blevins
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I added constructor injection
I added constructor injection for EJBs and Interceptors into OpenEJB.
We could probably do the same for servlets, filters and listeners if
we use xbean-reflect to create all of those.
The trick would be that the functionality wouldn't work unless they
compiled the code with debug. XBean
On Jun 25, 2008, at 9:17 AM, dnsunil wrote:
Hi David,
NO LUCK!!!
As requested TcpTimedWaitDelay paramter value has been decreased
from 4
minutes to 2 minutes and when run the program again the processing
within 10
minutes.
I don't know if adjusting the TcpTimedWaitDelay from 4
On Jun 24, 2008, at 12:32 PM, dnsunil wrote:
Hi,
When accessing a remote EJB running on Websphere CE environment from a
standalone client on Windows 2003 server throwing the below exception
Unknown Container Exception: java.rmi.RemoteException: Cannot read the
response from the server
+1
David
On Jun 18, 2008, at 3:10 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a distribution of Xbean 3.4.2 which includes the
following minor changes:
* Upgrade to ASM 3.1 and enable class reading speed boosts [1]
* Fix OSGi dynamic imports [2]
The staging repository is available at
+1
David
On May 20, 2008, at 5:22 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
If we are to take this proposal forward to the ASF Infrastructure
team, they want assurance that the Geronimo PMC is behind the
recommendation and supports the intended use of the systems. I
think it also bodes well to demonstrate
On May 16, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On May 15, 2008, at 2:32 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Setup google analytics on all our spaces and added everyone who's a
committer who I could easily find a gmail address for.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
with AMD to acquire these systems. When we got the systems
from AMD they agreed to provide them for the use of the GBuild
project and were never in a corporate owner's asset list. I
provided AMD with the ship to address (which I think was David
Blevins) so continuing to use them
, you just log in as an administrator and
make up a very long random pass for one time use, then use it to log
in as the geronimo-commits commits user.
-David
On May 15, 2008, at 5:28 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Seems all the commits lists were updated recently and everyone's
notifications were
Setup google analytics on all our spaces and added everyone who's a
committer who I could easily find a gmail address for.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
Seems all the commits lists were updated recently and everyone's
notifications were getting filtered again. It should be fixed in a
day or two.
-David
On May 12, 2008, at 11:56 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
something probably went wrong on the Confluence side. IIRC Dave
Blevins set this up,
Added a Clients section to the 2.1 docs with some added info and
some stuff copied from 2.0 docs. I put it as a section under the
User's Guide section for lack of a better place. The goal was to try
and pull it all client related information together into one spot.
If you have better
+1 with the standard tck disclaimer
David
On Apr 24, 2008, at 4:41 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
All,
I've prepared a second release candidate of Geronimo Server 2.1.1
for your review and vote.
The source for the Geronimo Server 2.1.1 release currently resides
here:
is wrong?
I did a manual look for CLA by last name for everyone who made any
edits. They might be there under a different name/spelling and
possibly I missed them.
-David
On Apr 21, 2008, at 10:00 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Apr 21, 2008, at 8:47 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
This may
On Apr 20, 2008, at 7:31 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One of the decisions will be what to do about documentation that has
already been contributed without a CLA.
I pulled down the revisions for these spaces: GMOxDOC10, GMOxDOC11,
GMOxDOC12, GMOxDOC20, GMOxDOC21, GMOxSITE
Report:
On Apr 21, 2008, at 6:42 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Apr 20, 2008, at 7:31 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One of the decisions will be what to do about documentation that
has already been contributed without a CLA.
I pulled down the revisions for these spaces: GMOxDOC10, GMOxDOC11,
GMOxDOC12
On Apr 21, 2008, at 8:47 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
This may be a dumb question, but what happens if a user submitted
content and then submitted a CLA sometime later on. Are CLA's
retroactive or does the content submitted before a CLA need to be
resubmitted?
Definitely not a dumb
It's already ASF policy that an ICLA be on file for anyone to get
write access to a confluence space used for official documentation or
a website (plain wiki usage is exempt). Updated a good 40~ cwiki
spaces to use the asf-cla group instead of confluence-users, including
ours, a couple
are going to restrict access to our wiki doc then we should
limit grating access to the project members. I'm not in favor of a
massive asf-cla group
cheers!
hernan
David Blevins wrote:
It's already ASF policy that an ICLA be on file for anyone to get
write access to a confluence space used
My bad!
On Apr 18, 2008, at 5:43 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Getting a fairly constant spam from the website sync script...
--jason
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cron Daemon)
Date: April 18, 2008 7:19:18 PM GMT+07:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Cron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Updated the OpenEJB version!
-David
On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
I created a branch for 2.1.1 that will be used to prepare for the
release. At the moment it is still versioned as 2.1.1-SNAPSHOT.
Just prior to this branch I published new 2.1.1-SNAPSHOT artifacts.
I also
On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:18 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
On 01/04/2008, at 7:52 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Mar 31, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
From: David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. I think we should try harder to separate the identification of
a constructor parameter as attribute
On Mar 30, 2008, at 9:40 AM, David Jencks wrote:
3. I think we should think long and hard if we really need to
identify references specifically. Can we get by with deciding how
to treat them based on what is in the plan?
An additional possible way to identify a reference is by checking
On Mar 31, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
From: David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. I think we should try harder to separate the identification of a
constructor parameter as attribute or reference from identifying
its name. So, I think we should use the java6 and xbean
Support for Generic Collections and Maps
Key: XBEAN-103
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XBEAN-103
Project: XBean
Issue Type: New Feature
Reporter: David Blevins
On Feb 29, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Vasily Zakharov wrote:
Hi, all,
I'm once again trying to couple SPECjAppServer2004 with Geronimo, now
version 2.1, and one of the problems I observe is:
Issue OPENEJB-700 that is now closed as it was fixed in OpenEJB v3.0b2
that is used in G2.1, seems to be still
Wow is that place extremely well decorated.
-David
On Mar 1, 2008, at 3:54 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
http://flickr.com/photos/jasondillon/sets/72157604001910491/
:-P
--jason
I created a very high level view of our documentation as it exists
across the various versions. Hopefully a very macro few of things may
help us clear the fog on documentation related thinking. At least I
found it very difficult to see the whole elephant.
On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:45 PM, David Jencks wrote:
This is great!!
Some of the links seem to be in red and claim that if you click them
they will create a new page. Anyone know what that means?
I put - links in just to make it easier if someone wants to create
the page. Though links to
Deleted my two.
-David
On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:07 PM, David Jencks wrote:
A few years ago I read about an information based perpetual motion
machine someone came up with. IIRC many people studied it for quite
a while before realizing that the flaw was an assumption that
erasing
Thanks for this. Excellent change.
-David
On Feb 25, 2008, at 1:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: gawor
Date: Mon Feb 25 13:49:02 2008
New Revision: 631012
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=631012view=rev
Log:
less maintainace headaches
Modified:
On Feb 24, 2008, at 6:36 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 2:51 AM, Gianny Damour
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have now some basic support for SFSB clustering. If you would like
to give it a try then here are some instructions.
Great! It's so simple from a user perspective
and add a new space, don't forget to
log in as geronimo-commits and add the watch. There's no real
password, just use your admin rights to set a very long, random,
password. Use it then forget it.
-David
On Feb 16, 2008, at 1:03 AM, David Blevins wrote:
We don't have notifications setup
Just updated it to 3.0-SNAPSHOT.
On Feb 17, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Gianny Damour wrote:
Hi,
Geronimo trunk declares 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT as the OpenEJB SNAPSHOT
version. OpenEJB trunk defines 3.0-SNAPSHOT as the version. Which
one is correct?
Thanks,
Gianny
On Feb 15, 2008, at 9:24 AM, David Jencks wrote:
I think we should work hard to make the documentation reference live
svn content using the snippet plugin. However my initial attempts
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC21/Plugin+infrastructure
I've gone ahead and added
Going to move this doc into 2.1 somewhere. Not sure where the best
fit is, so feel free to move it again.
-David
On Oct 10, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
I just ran a manual export of all the wiki spaces and the doc is now
visible from cwiki.apache.org/geronimo
I thought it
So a funny thing happened on the way to the theater :)
On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:05 PM, David Blevins wrote:
So the 10,000 foot perspective is that we are creating a conversion
tool to convert the prior openejb-jar.xml into the new set of
descriptors (geronimo-openejb.xml, new openejb-jar.xml
We don't have notifications setup for cwiki edits. I'm going to set
those up to go to the commit list unless anyone objects.
-David
+1!
Hard to believe it's here. Can't wait to see the splash.
-David
On Feb 10, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
All,
I've prepared a 2.1 release candidate for your review and vote. I've
also prepared a 2.1.1 TxManager release candidate for review and
vote. For simplicity, I'm
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:33 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of EJB 3.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-ejb_3.0_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:51 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JAXRPC 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jaxrpc_1.1_spec-2.0/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:25 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JAXR 1.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jaxr_1.0_spec-2.0/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:06 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of J2EE Connector 1.5 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-j2ee-connector_1.5_spec-2.0/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JSP 2.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jsp_2.1_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of ws-metadata 2.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-ws-metadata_2.0_spec-1.1.2/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:12 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JACC 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jacc_1.1_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:18 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JPA 3.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.1.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:51 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JMS 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jms_1.1_spec-1.1.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:04 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of EL 1.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-el_1.0_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:56 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JTA 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jta_1.1_spec-1.1.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:37 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JAAS 1.3 spec for vote.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jaas_1.3_spec-1.0/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/staging/geronimo-
jaas_1.3_spec-1.0/
Please review and
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:25 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of Interceptor 3.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-interceptor_3.0_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:19 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of annotations 1.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-annotation_1.0_spec-1.1.1
Repo
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:45 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of J2EE Management 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-j2ee-management_1.1_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
On Jan 24, 2008, at 5:23 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008, at 1:49 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
Do not copy any code into branches under any circumstances.
I'm not sure I agree with this. The documented procedures for
releasing involves moving the trunk version
My +1
-David
On Jan 10, 2008, at 2:35 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Discuss thread (for reference):
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200711.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Changes since last release
Vote passes with 9 +1s and no other votes.
-David
On Jan 10, 2008, at 2:35 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Discuss thread (for reference):
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200711.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Changes since last release
Binaries:
http://people.apache.org/~dblevins/stage-xbean/org/apache/xbean/
SVN Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-3.3/
Happy voting!
-David
/
/tagBase
/configuration
/plugin
-David
On Jan 9, 2008, at 9:39 PM, David Blevins wrote:
I'm trying to put a 2.1 release of geronimo-txmanager so we can
start voting (and so we can include it in openejb and start that
voting), but there seems to be an issue
We need a release of xbean for openejb 3.0-beta-2. So unless somebody
objects, I'll cut one friday.
-David
On Jan 10, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
- Is it necessary for both Geronimo and OpenEJB3 to move to ActiveMQ
5.0.0 concurrently or can Geronimo do this independently of OpenEJB3?
Should be possible to use whatever version we like in G independently
of OpenEJB.
-David
I'm trying to put a 2.1 release of geronimo-txmanager so we can start
voting (and so we can include it in openejb and start that voting),
but there seems to be an issue with the genesis:project-config pom
forcing the release plugin to *only* look in
On Dec 5, 2007, at 8:26 AM, Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
I am currently working on an Admin Console wizard to auto-generate
openejb-jar.xml http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3432
and one problem where I am currently stuck is given an EJB jar how
do I get it's meta-data complete
On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: dblevins
Date: Thu Dec 6 00:50:16 2007
New Revision: 601659
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=601659view=rev
Log:
rolling back the change. can't seem to get it to build.
Modified:
+1
David
On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:43 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
The discussion thread has been out there long enough for comment,
and those who have responded appear positive about the prospect. I
think it's time to put this to a vote. The full proposal from Matt
Hogstrom is attached at the
On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:55 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: dblevins
Date: Thu Dec 6 00:50:16 2007
New Revision: 601659
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=601659view=rev
Log:
rolling back the change. can't seem to get it to build
On Oct 23, 2007, at 9:50 PM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
Some questions on @Resource.mappedName processing. When an ejb is
deployed that has some @Resource annotated fields, OpenEJB will
process them and create the appropriate resource-ref entires in the DD
and pass it to Geronimo. But before the DD is
On Oct 2, 2007, at 7:02 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Ok, I made the following changes:
- Set the deployment id format to {appId}/{moduleId}/{ejbName}
(fixes GERONIMO-3199)
- Set jndiname format to {ejbName}{interfaceType.annotationName}
(this MUST go in the release notes
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3199?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12532189
]
David Blevins commented on GERONIMO-3199:
-
Attempted to fix this but tck issues ensued and had to revert
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2884?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
David Blevins closed GERONIMO-2884.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: (was: 2.0.x)
2.0.2
On Oct 1, 2007, at 4:24 PM, David Jencks wrote:
I talked with david a bit on irc and he tells me there is a flag so
we can set it so if there is a non-javaee jndi name conflict we log
an error instead of throwing an exception.
I'm happy with a simple default format for non-javaee jndi ejb
+1
--
David
On Oct 1, 2007, at 8:10 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Please vote on releasing xbean 3.2.
Binaries / maven repo is available at:
http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/xbean-3.2/
Svn source tag is available at:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-3.2/
It
On Sep 29, 2007, at 12:31 AM, David Jencks wrote:
On Sep 28, 2007, at 8:40 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 25, 2007, at 3:40 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 25, 2007, at 7:38 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One thing I've noticed -- the default JNDI name for EJB's has
been changed in OpenEJB
On Sep 25, 2007, at 3:40 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 25, 2007, at 7:38 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One thing I've noticed -- the default JNDI name for EJB's has been
changed in OpenEJB. So, there is a compatibility issue with 2.0.1.
We might be able to configure how OpenEJB generates
On Sep 26, 2007, at 4:01 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Sep 25, 2007, at 6:40 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 25, 2007, at 7:38 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One thing I've noticed -- the default JNDI name for EJB's has
been changed in OpenEJB. So, there is a compatibility issue with
2.0.1. We
://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3423
Donald,
Thanks a bunch for going through all of those Jiras!
David Blevins,
Are we missing 3423 in branches/2.0?
Heh. Looks like I merged the change to branches/2.0 in revision
570950 -- http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=570950
On Sep 25, 2007, at 7:38 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One thing I've noticed -- the default JNDI name for EJB's has been
changed in OpenEJB. So, there is a compatibility issue with 2.0.1.
We might be able to configure how OpenEJB generates this default to
maintain backward compatibility.
On Sep 25, 2007, at 8:44 AM, Anita Kulshreshtha wrote:
Right now I am stuck at this:
@RolesAllowed({a, b})
public class . {
@RolesAllowed(b) {
public .. dosomething() {
}
}
Does this prevent 'a' from accessing dosomething()?
Yes. See
301 - 400 of 1537 matches
Mail list logo
