Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 7/10/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maven 1 repos can be used from Maven 2.
I didn't know that.
Why would we need to post maven
1 jars into a maven 2 repository?
Well, if you're creating a Maven 2 project now, and you use the gr
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 7/11/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd recommend that projects using m2 wait for G 1.2, which will
hopefully be sooner rather than later.
Too late. For example, the Quartz plugin (already available on the
plugin repo) uses G 1.1 and Maven 2. I've been cop
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Recently I have been working on adding new features and bug fixes to
the xbean-spring code. This code is a lot harder to work with since
the test have been coppied into the v1 and v2 modules. It actually
make it very easy to make a change in v1 and not apply the same cha
IMO, I think that the m2migration branch should focus solely on m2
migration and leave the cruft cleaning for another effort.
Regards,
Alan
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
That is my code and it should be removed. I only added it for
debugging when working on configId branch.
-dain
On Jul 14, 2006,
+1 but, I would classify it as a bug fix not a change.
Regards,
Alan
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
+1 to make the change (pending tck verification)
-dain
On Jul 14, 2006, at 5:18 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
I've been taking some hard looks at all of the places where Geronimo
creates/configures ORB ins
Adding the fields so that they only show up for Geronimo Bugs is simple
enough. I can help. BTW, what about our RTC state discussion? Can I
go ahead and move on that idea?
Regards,
Alan
John Sisson wrote:
I'm fine with using fields instead, as it would be more work for
developers to use t
Not all specs will have 1.1 versions since some were "perfect" coming
out of the gate and, so, are still at 1.0.
Regards,
Alan
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I was confused by this also. There are some 1.1 specs but not all
specs moved to 1.1 in the last round. You can find the activation
spec rel
using legacy Maven 1 repos, it will
always fail.
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Since we don't necessarily plan on converting Geronimo 1.1.x to Maven
2, can we post the 1.1 JARs in a Maven 2 repo somewhere, with a
structure corresponding to the new 1.2/Maven 2 group IDs (o.a.g
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 7/11/06, Donald Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Geronimo Eclipse Plug-in build uses Maven 2 and depends on the v4
POMs to load the Geronimo dependencies correctly
OK, perhaps I should try to do the same thing that's being done there.
I'll check it out.
If you
a tardy +1
Regards,
Alan
Jeff Genender wrote:
+1
John Sisson wrote:
James Strachan wrote:
I've just applied 2 trivial bug fixes to the xbean-spring module of
XBean.
The first is a patch from Guillaume which is a one liner to create the
xml parser using a helper method (used by all
Well, it's been a week since I proposed culling the list. I'm going to
move the unselected issues to 1.1.x. If people think that they can
commit to completing the issue by freeze next Friday they are most
welcome to pick the issue up and move it over to 1.1.1.
Regards,
Alan
Yep, definitely do-able.
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
Only for bug types would be good.
--jason
On Jul 15, 2006, at 11:18 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Adding the fields so that they only show up for Geronimo Bugs is
simple enough. I can help. BTW, what about our RTC state
going.
Regards,
Alan
Aaron Mulder wrote:
What about the issues that really should be fixed? 2105? 2169? I'm
sure there are others.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 7/16/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, it's been a week since I proposed culling the list. I
I have updated the following projects so that issues that fall under the
RTC policy can be more easily tracked.
DayTrader
Geronimo
Geronimo-Devtools
XBean
One of the things that added was an RTC issue type. I've also forced
improvements and new features to follow the RTC workflow. This will
Yikes, which ones?
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
Looks like RTC is now in a bunch more groups than what you listed
below...
--jason
On Jul 16, 2006, at 11:16 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I have updated the following projects so that issues that fall under
the RTC policy can be more
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I opened 3 JIRAs that affect CMP deployment, Session bean performance
and consistency.
The JIRA's in question are:
GERONIMO-2127 - Expose ability to use SELECT FOR UPDATE
GERONIMO-2129 - Allow user to specify pool size on Stateless Session
Beans
GERONIMO-2128 - Allow use
Jason Dillon wrote:
Right now we are using geronimo-spec:geronimo-spec-corba:1.0 in the m2
build for G 1.2-SNAPSHOT. This is the only spec that we are using
that has the legacy geronimo-spec groupId.
Can we switch this to use one of these:
* org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-corba-2.3_spec
.
On Jul 7, 2006, at 3:32 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
When did we want to push this out the
door? I see a lot of work
scheduled for this micro release. I
think that we should time box this puppy for a freeze on 7/21 and for a
release on 7/28. Any
issues that haven't been picked
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Jul 18, 2006, at 8:53 AM, John Sisson wrote:
Whilst testing the geronimo eclipse plugin, eclipse prompted me to
acknowledge the Sun license at
http://developers.sun.com/license/berkeley_license.html when caching
the j2ee schema files (e.g.
http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/j
So much for time boxing. We've already extended the patch by one week. :)
I guess it makes sense to minimize the patch releases since each patch
release involves a TCK run.
Regards,
Alan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
There has been a lot of progress on 1.1.1. We started with 61 issues
and we're d
Yeah, a blocker. As a sanity check, do we get the same problem off of
trunk?
Regards,
Alan
Jeff Genender wrote:
Yep..I concur...this is a nasty one and we need to see whats up. This
is a blocker IMHO..
Jeff
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Jeff just noted that Liferay seems to take an abnormal amo
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
The PMC would like to welcome David Jencks as the newest member of the
PMC. Please join us in welcoming David.
Matt
Congrats David!
Regards,
Alan
Sachin Patel wrote:
As the Geronimo user base grows, it is important that we be able to
distinguish between JIRAs open during a development cycle to those
that are being hit in the field or requested by companies who either
use Geronimo or build products and or plugins on top of it. So I
sugg
If I understand the memo that came down from legal, we need to do this
for this patch release.
Regards,
Alan
Brian McCallister wrote:
Are you making this change for 4.0.2?
-Brian
On Jul 28, 2006, at 12:24 AM, James Strachan wrote:
Looks good to me. Thanks for sorting this out Hiram.
On 7
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Folks,
A memory leak was detected that we need to chase down. I'm going to
wait to branch until we isolate the problem. During this time please
go ahead and finish your last minute changes. I'll provide further
status when it becomes available.
Matt
I'm not sure th
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
While looking at http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XBEAN-28,
I was wondering if we should ask for xbean specific mailing lists.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't see enough traffic about xbean to warrant a new list. Just my
2 cents.
Regards,
Alan
Ahh, then it seems to make sense then.
Regards,
Alan
James Strachan wrote:
+1
Its got its own source tree, website and JIRA so I'd say it'd make
sense to have its own mailing lists too. Its also got quite active
lately :)
On 8/1/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While looking
Kevan Miller wrote:
Geronimo community members,
There is a Geronimo BOF being held at LinuxWorld in San Francisco,
later this month. Here are the details that I have:
BOF 15: Apache Geronimo 1.1 - Open Source Application Server
Wednesday, August 16, from 6-7 PM
Moscone Center Room 305
I'll be
Jason Dillon wrote:
FYI... I've updated to include most of the pages from the main site...
but have not fully converted them. But now you can get a better feel
for how the site might look:
http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxSITE/
--jason
Looks really great!
Regards,
Alan
What about the changes to the Jira that we made a few weeks ago?
Regards,
Alan
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
People have been referring to things requiring votes as
'RTCs'.
Everyone *please* stop using RTC in this manner. RTC is a
development mo
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
The memory leak is fixed. Thanks to Kevan for the quick work.
I am going to branch this afternoon at 1500. If you have something in
progress ping me and we'll work it out.
The branch will be branches/1.1.1 and will only be taking bug fixes
and performance regressions (
+1
Regards,
Alan
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Some LICENSE file issues were found in the first release candidate of the
4.0.2 build. I have cut and RC 2 of the 4.0.2 build with the fixes
and it's
available here:
http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.0.2-RC2/maven1/incubator-activ
... essentially we need a scheduled export on
some pages that have more dynamic content.
--jason
On Aug 2, 2006, at 10:13 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Jason Dillon wrote:
FYI... I've updated to include most of the pages from the main
site... but have not fully converted them. But now you can
This looks really great!
Regards,
Alan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geronimo - August 4, 2006
9 Patches in RTC
[XBEAN-33] [RTC] Add a new Wiki source generator that generates wiki markup
so that reference docs can be pasted into confluence.
- Assignee: Hiram Chirino
- Reporter
David Jencks wrote:
On Aug 4, 2006, at 12:25 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Thanks.
Since this report was just a demo, I've gone through some of the
JIRAs that had patches and owners, clicked their "Begin RTC Review"
buttons and am sending out a new report.
This looks very good.
I guess what w
Yeah, I'm kinda confused. Why do we need to include the Derby NOTICE?
Regards,
Alan
James Strachan wrote:
I thought the NOTICE file for Derby was just that its ASF code? Or is
the specific Deby stuff that needs adding to the NOTICE file?
On 8/3/06, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
Previously, this was set up so that only new features and improvements
followed the RTC flow. Now, this new scheme includes all issue types.
Does anyone know why this was changed?
Regards,
Alan
i provided a patch but was unable
to put it in RTC mode. RTC should also be applied to documentation, so
why were these issue types excluded
from the workflow ?
I think the main problem is that you can not easily recategorize issues
if they do not have the same workflow.
On 8/7/06, Al
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I propose we remove the m1 build. It has been broken for several days
now and no one has noticed. Here is my vote:
+1 to remove the m1 build
-dain
+1
Regards,
Alan
There's a ring of truth in these paragraphs.
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
For the record, I do think that it is a good idea to split G up into
some smaller chunks... I am just concerned about how small the chunks
become and how it may eventually lead to chaos I've been there
before
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Please welcome Kevan Miller as the newest member of the Geronimo PMC.
Kevan recently accepted the invitation to join the PMC. As such we
now have an additional set of eyes to help with reviews as well as
other PMC oversight responsibilities. Kevan has shown that he is no
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
We're pleased to let you know that we have a new committer in our
midst. Paul McMahan has recently accepted an invitation to join the
Geronimo project. Paul has been active on Geronimo for several months
and has provided numerous patches for the console and related
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Aug 8, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
1.1.1 is in a form that we can get ready to release it. I was
talking with Aaron and he mentioned that there were some security
issues he was concerned about. I would like to use this thread to
identify any issues that s
I can help by being a moderator.
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
It seems that there is a consensus to create these mailing
lists.
I will raise a JIRA for that on infra.
On 8/1/06, Guillaume
Nodet <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While looking at
http://issues.apache.org/jira/br
This is a good idea.
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
On Aug 11, 2006, at 12:32 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Have you thought about using specs/tags/- for
the tag names? That's what maven does, so I'm guessing you noticed
and didn't like it for some reason.
The issue with that is that specs
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 11 Aug 06, at 7:05 PM 11 Aug 06, Jason Dillon wrote:
I'm going to let this sit for the weekend, and if there are no
objections I'd like to implement this.
Or do we need a formal vote to to this?
You seem to have everyone's buy in, you've made the proposal and
prov
James Strachan wrote:
On 8/13/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems that nobody work on QDox since several months.
(see
http://www.nabble.com/Anyone-developing-QDox--tf705135r1.html)
Does anyone know of any replacement we could use to allow java 5
parsing ?
I was thinking of
I'll look into this.
Regards,
Alan
Aaron Mulder wrote:
I'm not sure if this is related to the recent web app security fix or
not.
I hacked the build enough that I got the 1.1.1 server running.
I went to the console, went to the database pool screen, selected that
I wanted to create a new po
Jason Dillon wrote:
What needs to be done to get the the TCK running on m2 builds of trunk?
Lets wrap that up and nuke the m1 build.
--jason
I could tell you but then I would have to kill you. :)
Seriously, I'm not sure what I can mention on a public list. Are you on
the TCK list?
Regar
Sweet. This will be nice.
Regards,
Alan
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Yep is just works.
-dain
On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:27 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
James Strachan wrote:
On 8/13/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems that nobody work on QDox since s
I found the problem and will fix it tonight.
Regards,
Alan
Aaron Mulder wrote:
I'm not sure if this is related to the recent web app security fix or
not.
I hacked the build enough that I got the 1.1.1 server running.
I went to the console, went to the database pool screen, selected that
I w
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Earlier this week, David convinced me to help him get the JPA entity
manager factories mapped into JNDI. And, that was the easy part, he
also wanted it to work in G 1.1. Today, I finally got it working and
wrote up some very rudimentary instruction on how to manually ins
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
Please join us in welcoming Guillaume who recently accepted an
invitation to join the Geronimo PMC. Guillaume is probably best known
for his work on Xbean and ServiceMix. Has always been available to
help out folks and is a great example of working in the community
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
We're pleased to announce that Grant McDonald has accepted
the invitation to join Apache ServiceMix as a committer.
Welcome Grant, and congratulations !
Congratulations Grant!
Regards,
Alan
David Blevins wrote:
On Aug 16, 2006, at 5:16 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
On Aug 16, 2006, at 4:38 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Aug 16, 2006, at 3:28 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
On Aug 16, 2006, at 3:21 PM, David Blevins wrote:
I guess I'd still prefer we do - for the tag
names as maven does.
I'm
+1
Regards,
Alan
David Blevins wrote:
+1, it's gotten a bit awkward the way we have it now.
-David
On Aug 15, 2006, at 3:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
I think we should move the top-level trunk, tags and branches to
server/*. This will make the top-level of our repository more
consistent.
FYI. Fixed.
Regards,
Alan
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I found the problem and will fix it tonight.
Regards,
Alan
Aaron Mulder wrote:
I'm not sure if this is related to the recent web app security fix or
not.
I hacked the build enough that I got the 1.1.1 server running.
I went t
What happened to a vote?
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
Okay... replying to myself.
How about... since no one has had anything to say.
I suggest we drop the m1 build at the end of next week, friday the 25th.
And unless I hear any objections I am going to follow through... so
please speak
s would be configured.
On 8/18/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why "hide" information in dot files? I personally prefer something like
> xbean-directive.xml so that when I jump into a directory I can plainly
> see what kind of shenanigans are go
Do you think that in might cause confusion when a config file accidentally
wanders into the classpath?
I personally prefer a fixed directory structure and, atm, cannot conceive of a
compelling use case that would require a non standard one.
Regards,
Alan
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBer
I'm going to take a crack at breaking out the classloading code into a
separate module. Should be simple enough.
I'll solicit comments when I'm done and we can do an RTC vote
afterwards, if all goes well.
Regards,
Alan
Its issue type was a bug. Bugs don't go through RTC. I have changed
its type to be RTC and moved its state to RTC review.
Regards,
Alan
David Jencks wrote:
GERONIMO-2332 didn't show up in the list of RTC issues sent out today,
and I don't see the "Begin RTC Review" button any ideas?
A
I'm wondering what why one would need such a bean.
Regards,
Alan
I think that we should move the XBean Jira notifications to the new
XBean dev list. Any objections?
Regards,
Alan
I'm going to start goofing around with this. I'll start by putting the
specs into geronimo/specs/branches. You can monitor the work:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2336
Regards,
Alan
Then we should create a list xbean-scm.
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
And svn notifiations too i guess.
On 8/19/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that we should move the XBean Jira notifications to the new
XBean dev list. Any objections?
Regards,
Alan
It's kinda out of date. I'll check my stuff in.
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
The spec is currently in
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/jaspi-spec/
On 8/19/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm going to start goofing around with
Thanks Jacek!
Regards,
Alan
Jacek Laskowski (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2336?page=all ]
Jacek Laskowski updated GERONIMO-2336:
--
Summary: JSR 196: JavaTM Authentication Service Provider Interface for Con
Jason Dillon wrote:
I keep running into problems switching my local jdk (ala setjdk) from
1.4 to 1.5 and forgetting to switch it back again when making G builds.
I though it would be nice if the build would fail early if I had the
wrong JDK configured. So, I wroke a require-java-version goal
Jira notifications created.
Guillaume, what did you do to get a list created?
Regards,
Alan
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
+1 to JIRA
+1 to create svn list
-dain
On Aug 19, 2006, at 12:02 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
+1
On 8/19/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that we
I wish that I had time. I read the spec this weekend and it looks kinda
interesting. Are you working on it?
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Do you plan to work on the implementation too ?
On 8/19/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's kinda out of date. I&
Removed.
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
If your stuff supersedes the bits in the sandbox can we remove the
sandbox stuff?
--jason
On Aug 19, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
It's kinda out of date. I'll check my stuff in.
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
T
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I'm going to take a crack at breaking out the classloading code into a
separate module. Should be simple enough.
I'll solicit comments when I'm done and we can do an RTC vote
afterwards, if all goes well.
Done, xbean/branches/classloader. Comments an
Can we go back to the root of the problem which is the distribution of
the schemas? This may have already been put to bed but, can't we get
permission from Sun to distribute these puppies?
Regards,
Alan
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Why not publish the src jar in addition to the binary?
-dain
On
Aaron Mulder wrote, On 4/8/2006 5:06 PM:
So I'm putting some stuff into 1.1, some of which is related to config
IDs and some of which is not.
My question is, for the stuff unrelated to config IDs, should I be
merging to HEAD right away? Or is it going to be easier if I don't
and we merge "ever
Aaron Mulder wrote, On 4/10/2006 10:33 AM:
I vote we plan to freeze on a Monday rather than a Friday, so we get
the weekend to cram in the last bits. :) I know there are a still
ton of JIRAs with my name on them for 1.1.
I'm a little worried that there have been some showstopper bugs in 1.1
t
+1
But then the only real vote that counts is Aaron "I really need this
feature" Mulder's. ;)
Regards,
Alan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
I'd like to propose we close 1.1 and start putting the wrapping tape
on the box. There have been new features / functions coming in and at
some point we
This makes sense t me.
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I'd like at least http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XBEAN-2 to be
fixed before the release.
Just have to apply the patch.
There are also patches for XBEAN-4 (m2 plugin for mapping generation) and
XBEAN-6 (bad dependencies scope) p
+1
Regards,
Alan
Aaron Mulder wrote:
All,
How would you feel about referring to configurations (e.g. a group of
GBeans with own ID and classloader) as a "module" instead? It seems
like "configuration" can be confusing, as it more traditionally refers
to a larger scope like an entire installat
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I'm for the change but as I ponder the ramifications to 1.1 I'm afraid
the scope of this modification is too large. The TCK needs to be
updated, lots of hard references, etc.
I vote that we change this in 1.2 and leave them as configId for now.
If we take this on I'm
+1
Regards,
Alan
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I have put some binaries of the new xbean-2.3 release.
They are available at http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/xbean-2.3/
[ ] +1 Release the binary as XBean 2.3
[ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
If the vote passes, I will put the binari
I do not agree. I do not think that we should have any sites that are
non-ASF, much less any non-ASF sites being the default. I do admit that
I have not thoroughly thought it out and am willing to discuss the
matter further.
Until such time, please consider this my -1 veto until we work this
Rick McGuire wrote:
The more the geronimo javamail support is starting to get used, the
more uncomfortable I'm getting with the current structure of the
javamail code. Let me level-set the situation first, so everybody
understands the issues.
To start with, the Sun impl of javamail is not re
I'll be there.
Regards,
Alan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Thought I'd start a thread to see which of the committers will be a
Java One. I seem to remember seeing a note about getting together to
discuss where we're at and where we're going but I don't remember
seeing a whose who in the zoo list.
al geronimo-javamail-nodep-x.x.jar artifact
that has all the jars merged together?
-dain
On May 2, 2006, at 1:57 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>> Rick McGuire wrote:
>>> The more the geronimo javamail support is starting to get used,
>>> the more un
ECTED]> wrote:
Why not create an additional geronimo-javamail-nodep-x.x.jar artifact
that has all the jars merged together?
-dain
On May 2, 2006, at 1:57 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>> Rick McGuire wrote:
>>> The more the geronimo javamail support is star
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
I have to disagree with putting up an ASF option as the default.
Let's say there are 50 plugins produced by Apache and 70 by outsiders.
We have a choice to make the default a repository containing 50
entries, or a repository containing 120 entries
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeff Genender wrote:
I offer a +0 instead of a +1 as I still think there needs to be some
hammering out of the details...but I am ok with where we are at and the
direction we will be going.
If A
One teeny thing. The Confluence icons are still coming from
goopen.org. Can we fix the HTML generator to replace those w/ "local"
images?
Regards,
Alan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
We're still waiting for the Codehaus Repo to go writeable. I just
checked their web site and there was no prognosis on the date yet.
I have some uncommitted performance changes and I believe others have
changes as well. Gianny was also completing some work on Tran
Jeff Genender wrote:
We have an initial swipe at some clustering to put into the sandbox, but
will have a need for the session api ;-)
Anyone have issue with putting the session API in 1.1 (the new trunk
version that is)? (Need 3 +1s)
Jeff
What is the session API?
Regards,
Alan
ering. It
allows different clustering implementations to be used with Geronimo.
It can be found here:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/modules/session
Jeff
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Jeff Genender wrote:
We have an initial swipe at some clustering to put into the sandbox, but
w
+1 new trunk
Jeff Genender wrote:
Let me follow this up too with some support...
JIRA GERONIMO-2046 is a patch (by Bill Dudney) for the first swipe at
full replication using the session API. I want to apply the patch to
place the code into the sandbox, but I need the session API available.
We
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Here are the things that I still want to squeeze into 1.1:
- fix console JMS to accept new providers at runtime
- fix console security realms to accept new providers at runtime
- add a missing Geronimo security provider to console security realms
- fix hot deploy dir so it not
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I would like to make the following changes to the dev tree for
Geronimo. Assuming there is concurrence and no objections I would
like to:
move geronimo/trunk to geronimo/branches/oldtrunk
copy geronimo/branches/1.1 to geronimo/trunk
Update trunk to version 1.3. I thin
This is a lot to swallow. I'll break out the parts that I'm
interested/concerned about.
Regards,
Alan
David Blevins wrote:
Just as a reminder, these notes are just a starting point for discussion.
-David
On May 19, 2006, at 2:01 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
All,
A great time was had at JavaO
+1
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
+1
--jason
On 5/22/06, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jason replied on another thread that he prefers to stay with 1.2 for
the release.
Here is the proposed nomenclature
trunk (stays 1.2 but is completely replaced with branches/1.
Do we need votes for bug fixes?
Regards,
Alan
David Jencks wrote:
I'd like to apply the patch
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12334350/GERONIMO-2006.patch
from http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2006
It fixes a buffer overflow problem in tomcat (which presumably
+1
Regards,
Alan
David Jencks wrote:
On May 23, 2006, at 2:47 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Do we need votes for bug fixes?
IIUC no but this includes new functionality as well, as I attempted to
indicate below.
thanks
david jencks
Regards,
Alan
David Jencks wrote:
I'd like to
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
1.1 is almost complete and its time to start thinking about 1.2.
Aaron summarized the discussion at Java One in his note. I believe
Aaron even volunteered to be the release manager for 1.2 :)
Isn't that like leaving the fox in charge of the chicken coop? ;)
Here's my
201 - 300 of 1022 matches
Mail list logo
