The ServiceMix web site as moved to its new location :-)
See http://servicemix.apache.org/
The cronjob which rsync the wiki to the web site has been updated and
now points to this new location, so that the incubator web site will
not be updated anymore.
I will try to put a redirect from
Hi,
It seems to me that this is classloader problem. [1] shows the similar
problem when use maven surefire plugin to run the test, and the solution
is add
useSystemClassLoadertrue/useSystemClassLoader to surefire plugin.
Hopefully it's helpful.
Hi All,
I have uploaded a version of ServiceMix 3.2 for you to review. See
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SM/ServiceMix+3.2
for all the links and release notes.
[ ] +1 Release ServiceMix 3.2
[ ] ± 0
[ ] -1 Do not release ServiceMix 3.2
Cheers
Freeman
Hi,
I am looking to have new MBean, which impl. interface
public interface RemoteInstallServiceMBean
{
public String remotelyInstallComponent(final String aFilePath,
final byte[] aFileData,
final
Why not using:
exchange = exchanges.remove(exchange.getExchangeId());
instead of
exchange = exchanges.get(exchange.getExchangeId());
exchanges.remove(exchange.getExchangeId());
It should be the same but in an atomic call.
On 10/26/07, Zacarias [EMAIL
[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SM-822?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Guillaume Nodet updated SM-822:
---
Fix Version/s: 3.2.1
3.1.3
java.lang.IllegalStateException: component is not
What about moving GShellout of the sandbox area and make it a real subproject ?
On 10/25/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Title says it all...I'd really like to see gshell as the default
execution for Geronimo 2.1. Any objectsions? Jason, is this something
you can get going?
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-215?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Tim McConnell updated GERONIMODEVTOOLS-215:
---
Fix Version/s: 2.0.2
Hi Alexei, Thanks very much for this
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
What about moving GShellout of the sandbox area and make it a real
subproject ?
Lets open a new thread on this...but Im all for it.
Jeff
On 10/25/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Title says it all...I'd really like to see gshell as the default
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2880?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
anish pathadan updated GERONIMO-2880:
-
Attachment: AMQ_NoTxDatasource.patch
TransportDisposedIOException occurs when trying
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2880?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12537956
]
anish pathadan commented on GERONIMO-2880:
--
Hi All,
The issue is due to geronimo using XA
i think the subject is explicit. What do people think about that ?
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
I don't see why we shouldn't. But can someone more informed please
list the pros and cons.
Thanx
Prasad
On 10/26/07, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think the subject is explicit. What do people think about that ?
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
Blog:
I implemented a posible solution for the component not owner problem. I
found that
deployables/bindingcomponents/servicemix-http/src/main/java/org/apache/servicemix/http/processors/ConsumerProcessor.java
sleeps meanwhile the jsr componet modifies the message.In JMSFlow the
variable exchange is
Could you raise a JIRA and attach your patch ? It seems to have been
removed from your email. Another solution is to use the nabble forums
too.
On 10/26/07, Zacarias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I implemented a posible solution for the component not owner problem. I
found that
It seems that patch files are filtered or something. I attached the patch
file at https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SM-822
Cheer,
Zacarias
On 10/26/07, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you raise a JIRA and attach your patch ? It seems to have been
removed from your
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3111?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12537990
]
Vamsavardhana Reddy commented on GERONIMO-3111:
---
Isn't this a duplicate of GERONIMO-2925?
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3111?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
David Jencks closed GERONIMO-3111.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 2.0.2
2.1
Assignee:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-411?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12537999
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-411:
---
With GERONIMO-2925 the passwords are all encrypted with a pluggable
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1565?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
David Jencks updated GERONIMO-1565:
---
Summary: Ldap Login Module should handle password hashing (was: PASSWORD
hashing to be
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1565?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12538008
]
Vamsavardhana Reddy commented on GERONIMO-1565:
---
I think LDAP Servers provide for storing a hashed
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-411?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12538004
]
Vamsavardhana Reddy commented on GERONIMO-411:
--
I agree with David. If the cause for concern is
On Oct 26, 2007, at 9:34 AM, Paul McMahan wrote:
This jetspeed integration is coming along nicely! Very promising
work.
Instead of introducing a MBE that automatically configures the
webapp for jetspeed based on the presence of WEB-INF/portlet.xml
can we look into allowing jetspeed to
This jetspeed integration is coming along nicely! Very promising work.
Instead of introducing a MBE that automatically configures the webapp
for jetspeed based on the presence of WEB-INF/portlet.xml can we look
into allowing jetspeed to handle its own deployment via placement in
its hot
On Oct 26, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
I don't see why we shouldn't. But can someone more informed please
list the pros and cons.
Here's my list:
Pro's
* Easier for other projects to reuse GShell
* Release cycle not tied to Geronimo server release cycle
Con's
* Small
Is it time to remove the old/unused plan files from trunk? I mean the
plan files in configs/module/src/plan/plan.xml. They have been
replaced by plans in configs/module/src/main/plan/plan.xml.
Jarek
On 10/24/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12538050
]
Jarek Gawor commented on GERONIMO-2784:
---
Here's what I've done so far. I moved geronimo-examples
On Oct 26, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 26, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
I don't see why we shouldn't. But can someone more informed please
list the pros and cons.
Here's my list:
Pro's
* Easier for other projects to reuse GShell
* Release cycle not tied
+1, they have already caused some confusion in at least one situation.
Best wishes,
Paul
On Oct 26, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
Is it time to remove the old/unused plan files from trunk? I mean the
plan files in configs/module/src/plan/plan.xml. They have been
replaced by plans in
On Oct 26, 2007, at 12:55 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Oct 26, 2007, at 9:34 AM, Paul McMahan wrote:
This jetspeed integration is coming along nicely! Very promising
work.
Instead of introducing a MBE that automatically configures the
webapp for jetspeed based on the presence of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Paul McMahan reassigned GERONIMO-2784:
--
Assignee: Paul McMahan (was: Jarek Gawor)
Thanks Jarek I will help with steps 5
Good explanation Kevan.
Seems like it makes sense to be a sub-project. IIUC there isn't a very
tight coupling between Geronimo and GShell since the Geronimo specifics
are in the command modules. So there is value to be gained in GShell
being a subproject.
Joe
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct
+1
Jay
Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i think the subject is explicit.
What do people think about that ?
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Makes sense to me. +1 for gshell as a subproject.
Best wishes,
Paul
On Oct 26, 2007, at 1:58 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 26, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
I don't see why we shouldn't. But can someone more informed please
list the pros and cons.
Here's my list:
Pro's
*
Jarek helped on GERONIMO-2784 by moving the samples from server/trunk
to samples/trunk. Now I would like to deploy those samples to the
ASF snapshot repo so they can still be downloaded/installed from
Geronimo's plugin catalog.This notification starts a 3 day lazy
consensus timer for
+1 from me.
On 10/26/07, Paul McMahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Makes sense to me. +1 for gshell as a subproject.
Best wishes,
Paul
On Oct 26, 2007, at 1:58 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 26, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
I don't see why we shouldn't. But can someone
On Oct 26, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
Is it time to remove the old/unused plan files from trunk? I mean the
plan files in configs/module/src/plan/plan.xml. They have been
replaced by plans in configs/module/src/main/plan/plan.xml.
Sounds good...
--kevan
Hi Orion,
Thanks for the note. I'm definitely interested in progress on the
geronimo terracotta plugin. So thanks for giving us a status update.
I have one clarification, below...
On Oct 24, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Orion Letizi wrote:
On Monday, we demonstrated the bitchen geronimo terracotta
Ah. Yes. I meant that we're trying to coincide the release of the
Geronimo Terracotta plugin with the release of Geronimo 2.1.
Cheers,
Orion
On Oct 26, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
Hi Orion,
Thanks for the note. I'm definitely interested in progress on the
geronimo terracotta
I'd like to run through them one more time and volunteer to remove
them at that point, probably this weekend or early next week.
thanks
david jencks
On Oct 26, 2007, at 11:07 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
Is it time to remove the old/unused plan files from trunk? I mean the
plan files in
I should have all of the necessary paperwork filed for TCK access.
Could someone email me to let me know how to join the mailing list and IRC
channel?
Or let me know if there is something else that I need to do.
I would like to be able to help out on the TCK testing, but my hands are kind
of
Hi all,
I was wondering - is it possible to have a plugin that needs 'at least one of'
or 'either of' some other plugin?
For example, it is possible to use dojo loaded from AOL's content delivery
network. So, if we made two versions of a Dojo plugin: One that has everything
in it (the full
So, who put the groovy-all 1.0 pom in the central repository?
This has *broken* a lot of projects and has made many releases
unbuildable...
Who did this and why? Anyone know?
--jason
On Oct 26, 2007, at 3:01 PM, Jay McHugh wrote:
Hi all,
I was wondering - is it possible to have a plugin that needs 'at
least one of' or 'either of' some other plugin?
yes, but maybe not exactly the way you are thinking about it.
For example, it is possible to use dojo loaded from AOL's
Probably just a sync from the codehaus repository.
On 26 Oct 07, at 3:49 PM 26 Oct 07, Jason Dillon wrote:
So, who put the groovy-all 1.0 pom in the central repository?
This has *broken* a lot of projects and has made many releases
unbuildable...
Who did this and why? Anyone know?
Unless I have missed something, we have lost the convenience of
running multiple instances of Geronimo by using a non zero PortOffset.
This is because the gener
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Sorry, for the keyboard malfunction..
--- Anita Kulshreshtha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless I have missed something, we have lost the convenience of
running multiple instances of Geronimo by using a non zero
PortOffset.
This is because the generated config.xml does not carry the
I found http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-550
and another linked issue that discuss the problem but there's still
nobody assigned to either issue.
Any chance the original change can be reverted or perhaps the pom
updated to remove the deps on openejb 1.0?
Joe
Jason Dillon wrote:
So,
I think that Geir has to ACK that the paperwork was completed. Has
he done so?
Regards,
Alan
On Oct 26, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Jay McHugh wrote:
I should have all of the necessary paperwork filed for TCK access.
Could someone email me to let me know how to join the mailing list
and IRC
50 matches
Mail list logo
