Thanks Tim,
We have some scheduled tck runs that include a small subset of the tests
which would highlight any major/pervasive issues. Since we haven't
noticed any issues on trunk I doubt we would hit any in branches/2.1
either. For a full run I or somebody else would have to manually kick
Hi Joe, the fix has been applied to branches\2.1 and the build works with it.
How a TCK run is scheduled/invoked is unclear to me though. Please advise if
there is something I need to do for that to occur. Thanks much.
Joe Bohn wrote:
So here is what I understand:
- This is exclusively a G se
On Apr 21, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
So here is what I understand:
- This is exclusively a G server problem and will not impact the GEP
2.1 release. However, GEP 2.1 could reference Geronimo 2.1.1 if it
is released in time and hence could potentially benefit from this
fix if inc
So here is what I understand:
- This is exclusively a G server problem and will not impact the GEP 2.1
release. However, GEP 2.1 could reference Geronimo 2.1.1 if it is
released in time and hence could potentially benefit from this fix if
included in Geronimo 2.1.1
- This is a long time probl
Hi Kevan/Joe, yes GERONIMO-3966 has been classified as a show-stopper for GEP
2.1, but I "think" we were assuming the problem was in the GEP and not the
server itself. However, it's apparently been a long-term problem in the server,
and is not a windows-only problem, so I'm not certain that it s
On Apr 21, 2008, at 9:09 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Shiva,
The same answer applies here that I just sent to Gianny. I've
included it here as well just so that you don't have to go hunting
branches/2.1.1 is closed to new changes beyond those which would
prevent us from shipping. I had int
Shiva,
The same answer applies here that I just sent to Gianny. I've included
it here as well just so that you don't have to go hunting
branches/2.1.1 is closed to new changes beyond those which would prevent
us from shipping. I had intended to have images up for vote a few days
ago,
branches/2.1.1 is closed to new changes beyond those which would prevent
us from shipping. I had intended to have images up for vote a few days
ago, but I'm having some difficulty creating those images. They will
hopefully be out for a vote later today.
You should include these changes in
And I would like to include
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=649354 in 2.1.1. This fixes
GERONIMODEVTOOLS-254, GERONIMO-3975 & probably many other issues. Shall I?
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Gianny Damour <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to port the change se
Hi,
I would like to port the change set -r 650083:650084 https://
svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/trunk to 2.1.1. This is a
very minor change.
If no one object, I will check-in in 24 hours.
Thanks,
Gianny
On 15/04/2008, at 4:20 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
I'd like to branch later today i
We have different levels of WADI being used in the build right now -
2.0-M10 for wadi-aop
2.0-M9 for other wadi-* depends
I think we want everything in WADI at the same level, but will let
Gianny answer on the other thread
-Donald
Joe Bohn wrote:
I'd like to branch later t
I was having some trouble staging the amq stuff but it seems to be
going now. I plan to update a bunch of versions in g. when this is
complete hopefully soon.
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 14, 2008, at 11:20 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
I'd like to branch later today in preparation for a 2.1.1 rel
I'd like to branch later today in preparation for a 2.1.1 release
(branches/2.1.1) and update branches/2.1 to 2.1.2-SNAPSHOT. Any
objections? Minor changes can still be made in branches/2.1.1 while we
make preparations for a release candidate.
AFAIK the only remaining changes are version up
13 matches
Mail list logo
