Fixed.Cheers,Guillaume NodetOn 6/22/06, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 21, 2006, at 6:37 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: IIUC, version specific informationhas snuck into elements that
should be version free, e.g. scm.Here is a list of elements that should have version information
I tallied the votes so far and have 5 +1 Votes from the PMC and 1 +0. 4 PMC
members did not vote.
11 Commiters voted +1 and there was 1 +0. 7 Committers did not vote.
It appears that 1.1 has been voted a release !!
Today I will begin staging the jars to the mirror system and send the Press
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2116?page=all ]
David Jencks closed GERONIMO-2116:
--
Resolution: Fixed
Patch applied in rev 416656. I also fixed the openejb version to 2.2-SNAPSHOT
from incorrect 2.1-SNAPSHOT
Precompile JSPs in
Project: Apache Geronimo
Status: Resolved, Closed (6 items)
Updated In Last: Week (7 days)
** Bug
* [GERONIMO-2141] javamail providers component referencing non-released
version of activation specs.
* [GERONIMO-2139] Link to Geronimo documentation is out of date, point still
to atlassian
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-83?page=comments#action_12417462
]
Sachin Patel commented on GERONIMODEVTOOLS-83:
--
Those are just warnings... The POM isn't actually needed for compilation. As
far as your error, I do
Add javamail 1.4 to geronimo specs.
---
Key: GERONIMO-2148
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148
Project: Geronimo
Type: New Feature
Security: public (Regular issues)
Components: mail
Versions: 1.2
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148?page=all ]
Rick McGuire updated GERONIMO-2148:
---
Attachment: javamail-1.4.diff
Full diff for creating the new geronimo-spec-javamail-1.4 module.
Add javamail 1.4 to geronimo specs.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148?page=all ]
Rick McGuire updated GERONIMO-2148:
---
Attachment: 1.4.diff
This is just an FYI diff, showing the changes made to create the javamail 1.4
version from the javamail 1.3.1 base.
Add
The following JIRA
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148
Contains patches for adding a javamail 1.4 module to the specs
component. I've attached 2 patches to this JIRA for the review. The
larger patch (javamail-1.4.diff) is the full patch required to create
the new module.
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-83?page=comments#action_12417469
]
Donald Woods commented on GERONIMODEVTOOLS-83:
--
What level of Java are you using?
Are you using Maven 2.0.4? Have you upgraded any of the Maven
inline..
--- Hernan Cunico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think we should keep creating so many spaces. The idea behind
having multiple spaces was to
allow easier management of the documentation as we deliver new
releases of Geronimo.
Documents not attached to specific Geronimo
When installing and uninstalling a component, Bootstrap#init is not called on
uninstallation
Key: SM-471
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SM-471
Project: ServiceMix
thanks Guillaume
When I added the version so:
plugin
groupIdorg.mortbay.jetty/groupId
artifactIdmaven-jetty6-plugin/artifactId
version6.0.0beta17/version
configuration
scanIntervalSeconds10/scanIntervalSeconds
A few days ago I had made a comment about Open for g-Business. Any thoughts as to whether we should
actually make this the server started message? I don't know if this would be considered conflicting
with IBM's Open for e-Business message but I like the ring.
Thoughts?
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SM-471?page=all ]
Guillaume Nodet resolved SM-471:
Resolution: Fixed
Assign To: Guillaume Nodet
Author: gnodet
Date: Fri Jun 23 05:43:55 2006
New Revision: 416704
URL:
I thought it was a funny comment, but it seems kind of cheesy to me in practice.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 6/23/06, Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few days ago I had made a comment about Open for g-Business. Any thoughts as
to whether we should
actually make this the server started
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I tallied the votes so far and have 5 +1 Votes from the PMC and 1 +0. 4
PMC members did not vote.
11 Commiters voted +1 and there was 1 +0. 7 Committers did not vote.
It appears that 1.1 has been voted a release !!
Congratulations!!
Bill
Yeah I think it would be somewhat cheesy as well.
On Jun 23, 2006, at 9:12 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
I thought it was a funny comment, but it seems kind of cheesy to me
in practice.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 6/23/06, Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few days ago I had made a comment about
[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-528?page=comments#action_36462 ]
Holger Hoffstätte commented on AMQ-528:
---
This one is *really* weird so I decided to ask Dawid Kurzyniec what might cause
this. Here's his reply:
Dawid Kurzyniec wrote:
Congrats!!!
Cheeers!
Hernan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I tallied the votes so far and have 5 +1 Votes from the PMC and 1 +0. 4
PMC members did not vote.
11 Commiters voted +1 and there was 1 +0. 7 Committers did not vote.
It appears that 1.1 has been voted a release !!
Today I will begin
I say pour on the cheese!
Paul
On 6/23/06, Sachin Patel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah I think it would be somewhat cheesy as well.
On Jun 23, 2006, at 9:12 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
I thought it was a funny comment, but it seems kind of cheesy to me
in practice.
Thanks,
Aaron
On
Hi,
I'm wondering does the move of the ServiceMix Eclipse tooling to the GoOpen
server signal a move forward in its status? :)
I'm in the process of attempting to build
servicemix-packaging-eclipse-plugin ... clearly this does not build straight
from subversion right now, and appears to have
[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-528?page=comments#action_36463 ]
Holger Hoffstätte commented on AMQ-528:
---
Quick follow-up:
Thanks a lot for clearing this up. Would it be possible for the nanoTimer
to discover the native JDK 1.5
It might seem a bit cheesy but Open for G-Business sounds GREAT. I love it!!!
:D
Cheez!
Hernan
Paul McMahan wrote:
I say pour on the cheese!
Paul
On 6/23/06, Sachin Patel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah I think it would be somewhat cheesy as well.
On Jun 23, 2006, at 9:12 AM, Aaron Mulder
Here is the revised press release for Geronimo 1.1. This incorporates all
feedback received.
PMC members, may I forward this to the PRC or will someone from the PMC send this? I will update
the Apache site with the distribution on Saturday. I plan to update the Geronimo Web Site on Monday
Could you raise a JIRA and attach the patch for review ?Thanks,Guillaume NodetOn 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:hi,We ( Me Manu )have created a implementation of global JNDI based
on the feedback received on the dev list.It works like this.* The implementation uses
btw, I have looked in the ServiceMix JIRA, but there does not appear to be
any entries for it, and the link on the wiki [here] is not a link:
http://goopen.org/confluence/display/SM/Eclipse+plugin
-Original Message-
From: David Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 23,
I like it ;-)
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
A few days ago I had made a comment about Open for g-Business. Any
thoughts as to whether we should actually make this the server started
message? I don't know if this would be considered conflicting with
IBM's Open for e-Business message but I like the
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1277?page=all ]
David Jencks reassigned GERONIMO-1277:
--
Assign To: David Jencks
Change group-id to org.apache.geronimo
--
Key: GERONIMO-1277
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1980?page=comments#action_12417521
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-1980:
I would really prefer the plugin installer be outside j2ee-system. Could we
put it in a separate configuration that we
Can someone help explain what I need to do to get a GBean installed
for GShell?
I've looked over some of the other GBeans and created:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/gshell/trunk/
gshell-server/gshell-server-gbean/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1659?page=comments#action_12417569
]
Anita Kulshreshtha commented on GERONIMO-1659:
--
The sytstem module underwent many changes to incorporate geronimo plugins.
More ant code was added for
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2044?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-2044:
--
Resolution: Cannot Reproduce
Compilation failure: java.nio.BufferOverflowException
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1732?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1732:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
Module migration to Maven 2: jetty-builder
--
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1731?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1731:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
Module migration to Maven2: jetty
-
Key:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1725?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1725:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
geronimo-dependency.xml has been checked into the code
Module migration to Maven 2:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1677?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1677:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
geronimo-dependency.xml files generated by m1 build have been checked into the
code.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1660?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1660:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
Application migration to Maven 2: Console
-
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1564?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1564:
--
Fix Version: 1.1
(was: 1.2)
Resolution: Fixed
Use specific geronimo.assemble.xx properties in assembly
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1785?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha resolved GERONIMO-1785:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
Application migration to Maven 2: magicGball
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1702?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha closed GERONIMO-1702:
Fix Version: 1.2
Resolution: Fixed
Now maven 1 and maven 2 builds are independent of each other.
The latest maven 1 Build
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1564?page=all ]
John Sisson reopened GERONIMO-1564:
---
This has been reopened as the proposed changes in the description have not been
made and are not in 1.1.
Use specific geronimo.assemble.xx
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1564?page=all ]
John Sisson updated GERONIMO-1564:
--
Fix Version: 1.2
(was: 1.1)
Version: 1.1
Use specific geronimo.assemble.xx properties in assembly project.xml files
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
A few days ago I had made a comment about Open for g-Business. Any
thoughts as to whether we should actually make this the server started
message? I don't know if this would be considered conflicting with
IBM's Open for e-Business message but I like the ring.
Thoughts?
Great point John. I didn't think of that.
Paul
On 6/24/06, John Sisson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
A few days ago I had made a comment about Open for g-Business. Any
thoughts as to whether we should actually make this the server started
message? I don't know if this
oops! my mistake..
Thanks
Anita
--- John Sisson (JIRA) dev@geronimo.apache.org wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1564?page=all ]
John Sisson reopened GERONIMO-1564:
---
This has been reopened as the proposed changes in
46 matches
Mail list logo
