Hi,
Which URL should be used with svn to checkout the source for building
1.0 release candidate? Is it
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.0/ or
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/tags/1.0.0/ or something else?
Thanks,
Vamsi
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1012?page=all ]
David Jencks reopened GERONIMO-1012:
Assign To: David Jencks (was: Jeff Genender)
As noted in one of the comments, the previous fix did not work for unprotected
pages in a
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1012?page=all ]
David Jencks closed GERONIMO-1012:
--
Fix Version: 1.1
(was: 1.0-M5)
Resolution: Fixed
Jeff pointed out how to add the DefaultSubjectValve after the
David Jencks wrote:
It is possible (I think) to do what you want, but I do not recommend
it. I would prefer that you use external plans, and write 2 new
modules inside configs, to deploy your sample to jetty and to
tomcat. Take the geronimo-web.xml out of the app and put it in src/
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Well... is it possible to make this not specific to WADI? Perhaps
make it a generic clustering manager tag, and is just so happens
that the only classes we let you configure so far are the WADI ones?
Ideally, we'd put some generic interface in the Geronimo space, and
After further thought...
I imagine it going like this:
container checks for the WEB-INF/web.xml/distributable/ tag.
If it exists, container looks at the e.g.
geronimo-web.xml/distributable-session-manager/ tag.
The value of this tag could be either an enum (e.g. {WADI,...}), a
classname or
Hi Gianny,
I have a question on CMR
Consider a Bean A and a bean B in a one to many CMR relationship
Here A has 2 fields in the PK say a1 and a2
B has b1 fka1 and fka2 as the pk where fka1 and fka2 are the foreign
keys corressponding to the a1 and a2 of A.
In
the ejbCreate of B when we set
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Well... is it possible to make this not specific to WADI? Perhaps
make it a generic clustering manager tag, and is just so happens
that the only classes we let you configure so far are the WADI ones?
Ideally, we'd put some generic interface in the Geronimo space, and
Sorry guys but
-1
I've just had a report of a security issue in Jetty that reveals the
contents of WEB-INF on win32 platforms.Happy f*#ing new year!
I have a fix and will be making a release very shortly. To avoid any
other issues, I will probably roll back the other changes in HEAD so
Greg Wilkins wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Well... is it possible to make this not specific to WADI? Perhaps
make it a generic clustering manager tag, and is just so happens
that the only classes we let you configure so far are the WADI ones?
Ideally, we'd put some generic interface in the
Greg Wilkins wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Well... is it possible to make this not specific to WADI? Perhaps
make it a generic clustering manager tag, and is just so happens
that the only classes we let you configure so far are the WADI ones?
Ideally, we'd put some generic interface in the
javax.mail.internet.InternetHeaders has some non implemented features
-
Key: GERONIMO-1419
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1419
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Components: specs
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1419?page=all ]
Guillaume Nodet updated GERONIMO-1419:
--
Attachment: GERONIMO-1419.patch
Patch for non implemented methods in javax.mail.internet.InternetHeaders
javax.mail.internet.InternetHeaders
In my personal experience, any machine in a cluster is fully in a
cluster -- I haven't seen something like 10 machines running 1
clustered app and then each running something else on the side.
However, it is kind of nice in WebLogic that you can deploy to either
a cluster or a single machine. I
Aaron Mulder wrote:
In my personal experience, any machine in a cluster is fully in a
cluster -- I haven't seen something like 10 machines running 1
clustered app and then each running something else on the side.
I can't agree...I may want to cluster my app, but I surely do not want
to
Hmm, again we have stopped the discussion :). Lets get it started again.
So can we all come to some agreement (with more discussion)on which direction we might be taking !!
Like merging ActiveCluster and WADI or getting best of both worlds ?
And also if we can define expectations/requirments
Greg,
I was wrapping up the release last night and was releasing it today based on the
prior feedback. Can you provide some more details on the exposure? My
preference would be to release G 1.0 as is and fix this in 1.0.1. I need your
expert opinion of the exposure WRT to security.
There
HTTP Status 500 message should refer to geronimo logs
-
Key: GERONIMO-1420
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1420
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Versions: 1.1
Environment: All
Reporter:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It's my understading that we're going for JEE 5. I think that our
re-arch of security should go into that as well.
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we cut a 2.0 development branch?
Regards,
Alan
+1...I really like this idea.
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
It's my understading that we're going for JEE 5. I think that our
re-arch of security should go into that as well.
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we cut a 2.0 development branch?
Does anybody know who initially setup the IRC archive and/or how to get
it back again? It looks like somebody with id bevinbot set it up ...
similar enough to make me wonder if it was Blevins but different enough
so that I can't be sure. I'd be glad to help get this working again if
I can
Jan,
Per the commit of r366236...
-1 on including Axiom. That is just for the web app. We should not be
including that in the container. Also, you can use the standard
ActiveMQ..there is no need to use the WADI version. The WADI version
was due to M2 POMs being incorrect and it broke the
Joe Bohn schrieb:
I'd be glad to help get this working again if
I can get some pointers. It's been down for nearly 2 months now and I
really miss it.
Joe
Maybe it would be even possible to register the Geronimo project at ...
* The CIA Open Source Notification System
-
For the moment these are identical so it really doesn't matter. Once
1.0 is official then you would use the tag to get back to level that is
released as 1.0. I imagine that the branch will be used for maintenance
on 1.0 with tags created for specific fixpacks.
Joe
Vamsavardhana Reddy
Vamsavardhana,
It should be built from the 1.0.0 tag (the 2nd url you had below), as
the 1.0 branch will soon contain changes for 1.0.1.
John
Vamsavardhana Reddy wrote:
Hi,
Which URL should be used with svn to checkout the source for building
1.0 release candidate? Is it
I've been trying to build 1.0 for a while now on winXP and I always get
a failure preparing the CRLF endings (actually I get this failure about
90% of the time and it works the other 10%).
assemble:package-assembly:
[echo] Preparing CRLF line endings in text based files for zip
Hi Jason,
how is the installation doc coming, do you need any help on the confluence side?
I saw what you started to work on the Getting the source code section, I would suggest to keep
this task simple. We do not want to _scare_ the users with way too complicated commands and
parameters, all
DB portlet failure in Tomcat only
-
Key: GERONIMO-1421
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1421
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Components: console, Tomcat
Versions: 1.0
Reporter: Aaron Mulder
Fix For:
On my machine, if I don't do a fresh-checkout the build fails. In fact it always fails the first
attempt and the second round works as long as I do the fresh-checkout.
Any idea why this is happening?
Cheers!
Hernan
Sachin Patel wrote:
- sachin
On Jan 5, 2006, at 4:16 PM, Hernan Cunico
2006/1/5, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It's my understading that we're going for JEE 5. I think that our
re-arch of security should go into that as well.
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we
After chatting on IM, it does appear that it is too late to
change the jetty version, so I retract my -1 and make it a -0.
The 1.0 release can go out with the windows security problem - I don't
think many will be rushing it into production.
The Jetty 5.1.10 release is available and the can be
If there are no objections I can register the Geronimo project with ...
* http://meme.b9.com/ - That's a channel logger
with a search interface.
* lisppaste - that's a pastbot with a corresponding web interface.
* CIA - That's an open source tracking system. which tracks the
project's
On 1/5/06, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's my understading that we're going for JEE 5. I think that our
re-arch of security should go into that as well.
Agreed.
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we cut a 2.0 development branch?
I
You need to do the fresh-checkout the first time you get the source so
that you get the OpenEJB code (from CVS). AFAIK, you shouldn't need to
do a fresh-checkout again because an m:update will update both svn and
OpenEJB CVS files.
Not sure why you would need to do a fresh-checkout a second
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Snyder wrote, On 1/5/2006 3:43 PM:
On 1/5/06, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's my understading that we're going for JEE 5. I think that our
re-arch of security should go into that as well.
Agreed.
How do we want to
On 1/5/06, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we cut a 2.0 development branch?
I suppose that the JEE 5 work would be best suited to a 2.0 branch.
That means that there is a potential to have to do a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Snyder wrote, On 1/5/2006 4:26 PM:
On 1/5/06, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we cut a 2.0 development branch?
I suppose that the JEE 5 work would be
Geronimo shutdown does not complete due to ActiveMQ attempting to reconnect
endpoints to broker every 30 seconds
Key: GERONIMO-1422
URL:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1422?page=all ]
John Sisson updated GERONIMO-1422:
--
Fix Version: 1.1
Version: 1.0
Geronimo shutdown does not complete due to ActiveMQ attempting to reconnect
endpoints to broker every 30
I have encountered some Geronimo shutdown issues with ActiveMQ on the
1.0 release candidate on Solaris 10 x86 under VMWare.
Can anyone else reproduce this issue (see GERONIMO-1422 for details) on
other OSes?
Is the slash after the word deploy in the file RELEASE-NOTES-1.0.txt intended?
* Hot Deploy by copying your deployment artifact to the deploy/
directory
--
perl -e 'print unpack(u,62V5N\FME;G\!EFQ`9VUA:6PN8V]M\[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)'
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1422?page=all ]
anita kulshreshtha updated GERONIMO-1422:
-
Attachment: shutdown.txt
I am seeing the same on win XP when -
* start using java -jar
* connect to the daytrader web app
*
We should mention in the download information that the installer isn't
available in this release and will be available in the upcoming 1.0.1
release.
Thanks,
John
Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 1/5/06, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When
should we cut a 2.0 development branch?
I suppose that the JEE 5 work would be best suited to a 2.0 branch.
That means that there is a
The Apache Geronimo team is proud to announce the availability of Geronimo
Version 1.0 for immediate download. Please visit
http://geronimo.apache.org/downloads.html.
The release has passed all J2EE 1.4 Certification Tests. In addition, many
thanks to our community and volunteers that have
Congrats
-- dims
On 1/5/06, Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Apache Geronimo team is proud to announce the availability of Geronimo
Version 1.0 for immediate download. Please visit
http://geronimo.apache.org/downloads.html.
The release has passed all J2EE 1.4
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
The Apache Geronimo team is proud to announce the availability of
Geronimo Version 1.0 for immediate download. Please visit
http://geronimo.apache.org/downloads.html.
CONGRATULATIONS
Cheers,
Erin
Great work to the team...especially Matt for taking a beating getting us
here. This was a long hard roadand important milestone. Special
thanks to *everyone* in the community for helping to test this and find
the hidden nasties.
Jeff
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
The Apache Geronimo team is proud
Awesome work guys. This is a great accomplishment!
- Dan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
The Apache Geronimo team is proud to announce the availability of
Geronimo Version 1.0 for immediate download. Please visit
http://geronimo.apache.org/downloads.html.
The release has passed all J2EE 1.4
Congrats and nice work to all!!
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hogstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 6:18 PM
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org; user@geronimo.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ANNOUNCE Geronimo Version 1.0 Available for Download
The Apache
really good news, but the release notes link is broken.
On 1/6/06, Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Congrats and nice work to all!!
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hogstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 6:18 PM
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org;
Are you sure you weren't redirected to a mirror that hasn't synced yet
with the new release? In my case the suggested mirror site didn't have
the file, but the other mirror sites did.
Hopefully it will fix itself soon.
John
Ken Perl wrote:
really good news, but the release notes link is
52 matches
Mail list logo
