On Jul 16, 2008, at 3:39 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
I just committed this change. It doesn't look like this is
causing any tck issues.
Guessing a lot of those places you added the 3.1 api were more or
less &qu
On Jul 16, 2008, at 10:43 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 16, 2008, at 3:39 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
I just committed this change. It doesn't look like this is
causing any tck issues.
Guessing a lot of
zeros wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot. It was the solution. In the documentation which I have, the
> local and remote interfaces are shown by and
> , but substituing those by
> and
> it works perfectly.
>
> With tags i meant @Local and @Remote
>
> Thanks a lot again
>
Just a note. In the latest
On Jun 24, 2008, at 12:32 PM, dnsunil wrote:
When accessing a remote EJB running on Websphere CE environment from a
standalone client on Windows 2003 server throwing the below exception
Unknown Container Exception: java.rmi.RemoteException: Cannot read the
response from the server (OEJP/2.0)
On Jul 31, 2008, at 12:20 AM, David Jencks wrote:
My impression based on gossip is that while it's possible to copy an
entire wiki space it isn't possible to move individual pages between
spaces. Is this correct?
On Jul 31, 2008, at 3:38 PM, David Jencks wrote:
3. Create a new space for
+1
David
On Jul 30, 2008, at 7:52 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
All,
I've prepared a release candidate of Geronimo Server 2.1.2 for your
review and vote.
The source for the Geronimo Server 2.1.2 release currently resides
here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/branches/2.1.2
When t
On Aug 4, 2008, at 2:19 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
We could add the note in the version that we post to the wiki.
That seems good enough to me.
For future release notes, we might want to add a link at the top to
the online release notes with some "look here for updated information"
type text.
On Aug 6, 2008, at 8:36 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Aug 4, 2008, at 4:49 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 2:06 AM, Kevan Miller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
B) A maven build will access multiple, redundant, versions of the
same
artifact. We control the versions that will b
On Aug 19, 2008, at 6:35 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Also, on 4/18 David Blevins added this comment in the thread:
"I definitely think our website should remain restricted to
committers. I sort of see that as separate from the rest of our
spaces. "
I vaguely recall there was a desir
On Sep 3, 2008, at 3:50 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Sep 3, 2008, at 12:28 PM, Ted Kirby wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:37 PM, David Jencks
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 3, 2008, at 11:17 AM, Ted Kirby wrote:
I opened JIRA (GERONIMO-4276) openejb-jar-2.2.xsd missing from the
schema s
I've added some functionality to OpenEJB trunk which has been enabled
in Geronimo trunk. Here's an overview of how it works:
DISCOVERY
What we have going on from a tech perspective is each server sends and
receives a multicast heartbeat. Each multicast packet contains a
single URI that a
On Sep 18, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Jay D. McHugh wrote:
I would like to be involved too.
But, I don't have any experience with either AntHill or Hudson.
Has anyone used Continuum? Would that be harder/easier to configure
and
use than the other two?
The first version of GBuild ran a mashup of
Didn't see them documented anywhere so I threw up a basic doc using
Gianny's commit info and a few code examples. Might be a doc in
another space I didn't notice.
http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV/gbean-annotations.html
Feel free to expand upon it.
-David
On Dec 5, 2007, at 8:26 AM, Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
I am currently working on an Admin Console wizard to auto-generate
openejb-jar.xml http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3432
and one problem where I am currently stuck is "given an EJB jar how
do I get it's meta-data complete ejb-
On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: dblevins
Date: Thu Dec 6 00:50:16 2007
New Revision: 601659
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=601659&view=rev
Log:
rolling back the change. can't seem to get it to build.
Modified:
geronimo/server/trunk/framework/modules/g
+1
David
On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:43 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
The discussion thread has been out there long enough for comment,
and those who have responded appear positive about the prospect. I
think it's time to put this to a vote. The full proposal from Matt
Hogstrom is attached at the en
On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:55 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: dblevins
Date: Thu Dec 6 00:50:16 2007
New Revision: 601659
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=601659&view=rev
Log:
rolling back the change. can't seem to get it
I'm trying to put a 2.1 release of geronimo-txmanager so we can start
voting (and so we can include it in openejb and start that voting),
but there seems to be an issue with the genesis:project-config pom
forcing the release plugin to *only* look in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/g
en.plugins
maven-release-plugin
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/txmanager/tags/
-David
On Jan 9, 2008, at 9:39 PM, David Blevins wrote:
I'm trying to put a 2.1 release of geronimo-txmanager so
Discuss thread (for reference):
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200711.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Changes since last release:
r585608 | dain | 2007-10-17 10:56:54 -0700 (Wed, 17 Oct 2007) | 1
l
We need a release of xbean for openejb 3.0-beta-2. So unless somebody
objects, I'll cut one friday.
-David
On Jan 10, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
- Is it necessary for both Geronimo and OpenEJB3 to move to ActiveMQ
5.0.0 concurrently or can Geronimo do this independently of OpenEJB3?
Should be possible to use whatever version we like in G independently
of OpenEJB.
-David
Binaries:
http://people.apache.org/~dblevins/stage-xbean/org/apache/xbean/
SVN Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-3.3/
Happy voting!
-David
My +1
-David
On Jan 10, 2008, at 2:35 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Discuss thread (for reference):
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200711.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Changes since last release
Vote passes with 9 +1s and no other votes.
-David
On Jan 10, 2008, at 2:35 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Discuss thread (for reference):
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200711.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Changes since last release
On Jan 24, 2008, at 5:23 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008, at 1:49 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
Do not copy any code into branches under any circumstances.
I'm not sure I agree with this. The documented procedures for
releasing involves moving the trunk version int
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:33 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of EJB 3.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-ejb_3.0_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gn
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:51 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JAXRPC 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jaxrpc_1.1_spec-2.0/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:25 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JAXR 1.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jaxr_1.0_spec-2.0/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gno
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:06 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of J2EE Connector 1.5 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-j2ee-connector_1.5_spec-2.0/
Repo
http://p
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JSP 2.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jsp_2.1_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gno
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of ws-metadata 2.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-ws-metadata_2.0_spec-1.1.2/
Repo
http://people
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:12 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JACC 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jacc_1.1_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~g
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:18 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JPA 3.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.1.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gno
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:51 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JMS 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jms_1.1_spec-1.1.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gno
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:04 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of EL 1.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-el_1.0_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gnode
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:56 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JTA 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jta_1.1_spec-1.1.1/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gno
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:37 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of JAAS 1.3 spec for vote.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-jaas_1.3_spec-1.0/
Repo
http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/staging/geronimo-
jaas_1.3_spec-1.0/
Please review and v
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:25 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of Interceptor 3.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-interceptor_3.0_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
http://people
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:19 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of annotations 1.0 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-annotation_1.0_spec-1.1.1
Repo
http://people.a
+1
On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:45 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a release of J2EE Management 1.1 spec for vote.
The main change is that the jar is packaged as an OSGi bundle.
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-j2ee-management_1.1_spec-1.0.1/
Repo
http
+1!
Hard to believe it's here. Can't wait to see the splash.
-David
On Feb 10, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
All,
I've prepared a 2.1 release candidate for your review and vote. I've
also prepared a 2.1.1 TxManager release candidate for review and
vote. For simplicity, I'm holdin
On Feb 15, 2008, at 9:24 AM, David Jencks wrote:
I think we should work hard to make the documentation reference live
svn content using the snippet plugin. However my initial attempts
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC21/Plugin+infrastructure
I've gone ahead and added thi
Going to move this doc into 2.1 somewhere. Not sure where the best
fit is, so feel free to move it again.
-David
On Oct 10, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
I just ran a manual export of all the wiki spaces and the doc is now
visible from cwiki.apache.org/geronimo
I thought it wou
So a funny thing happened on the way to the theater :)
On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:05 PM, David Blevins wrote:
So the 10,000 foot perspective is that we are creating a conversion
tool to convert the prior openejb-jar.xml into the new set of
descriptors (geronimo-openejb.xml, new openejb-jar.xml
We don't have notifications setup for cwiki edits. I'm going to set
those up to go to the commit list unless anyone objects.
-David
Just updated it to 3.0-SNAPSHOT.
On Feb 17, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Gianny Damour wrote:
Hi,
Geronimo trunk declares 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT as the OpenEJB SNAPSHOT
version. OpenEJB trunk defines 3.0-SNAPSHOT as the version. Which
one is correct?
Thanks,
Gianny
x27;re an admin and add a new space, don't forget to
log in as geronimo-commits and add the watch. There's no real
password, just use your admin rights to set a very long, random,
password. Use it then forget it.
-David
On Feb 16, 2008, at 1:03 AM, David Blevins wrote:
We don&#
On Feb 24, 2008, at 6:36 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 2:51 AM, Gianny Damour
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We have now some basic support for SFSB clustering. If you would like
to give it a try then here are some instructions.
Great! It's so simple from a user perspective
Thanks for this. Excellent change.
-David
On Feb 25, 2008, at 1:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: gawor
Date: Mon Feb 25 13:49:02 2008
New Revision: 631012
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=631012&view=rev
Log:
less maintainace headaches
Modified:
geronimo/server/trunk/plugins/
I created a very high level view of our documentation as it exists
across the various versions. Hopefully a very macro few of things may
help us "clear the fog" on documentation related thinking. At least I
found it very difficult to see the whole elephant.
http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV
On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:45 PM, David Jencks wrote:
This is great!!
Some of the links seem to be in red and claim that if you click them
they will create a new page. Anyone know what that means?
I put "-" links in just to make it easier if someone wants to create
the page. Though links to
Deleted my two.
-David
On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:07 PM, David Jencks wrote:
A few years ago I read about an information based perpetual motion
machine someone came up with. IIRC many people studied it for quite
a while before realizing that the flaw was an assumption that
erasing information
On Feb 29, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Vasily Zakharov wrote:
Hi, all,
I'm once again trying to couple SPECjAppServer2004 with Geronimo, now
version 2.1, and one of the problems I observe is:
Issue OPENEJB-700 that is now closed as it was fixed in OpenEJB v3.0b2
that is used in G2.1, seems to be still
Wow is that place extremely well decorated.
-David
On Mar 1, 2008, at 3:54 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
http://flickr.com/photos/jasondillon/sets/72157604001910491/
:-P
--jason
from downloading.
Ok, I'll check that, thanks.
Vasily
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:56 AM, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
On Feb 29, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Vasily Zakharov wrote:
Hi, all,
I'm once again trying to couple SPECjAppServer2004 with Geronimo, now
version 2.1,
+1. Looks great.
-David
On Mar 4, 2008, at 9:40 AM, David Jencks wrote:
The current release process docs http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxPMGT/Release+Branching+Process
indicate they were subject to a vote, so I think a major change
also needs a vote.
Please vote on changin
On Mar 30, 2008, at 9:40 AM, David Jencks wrote:
3. I think we should think long and hard if we really need to
identify references specifically. Can we get by with deciding how
to treat them based on what is in the plan?
An additional possible way to identify a reference is by checking the
On Mar 31, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
From: David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1. I think we should try harder to separate the identification of a
constructor parameter as attribute or reference from identifying
its name. So, I think we should use the java6 and xbean
@Parameter
On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:18 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
On 01/04/2008, at 7:52 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Mar 31, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
From: David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1. I think we should try harder to separate the identification of
a constructor parame
Updated the OpenEJB version!
-David
On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
I created a branch for 2.1.1 that will be used to prepare for the
release. At the moment it is still versioned as 2.1.1-SNAPSHOT.
Just prior to this branch I published new 2.1.1-SNAPSHOT artifacts.
I also u
It's already ASF policy that an ICLA be on file for anyone to get
write access to a confluence space used for official documentation or
a website (plain "wiki" usage is exempt). Updated a good 40~ cwiki
spaces to use the asf-cla group instead of confluence-users, including
ours, a couple w
e are going to restrict access to our wiki doc then we should
limit grating access to the project members. I'm not in favor of a
massive asf-cla group
cheers!
hernan
David Blevins wrote:
It's already ASF policy that an ICLA be on file for anyone to get
write access to a confluence
My bad!
On Apr 18, 2008, at 5:43 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Getting a fairly constant spam from the website sync script...
--jason
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cron Daemon)
Date: April 18, 2008 7:19:18 PM GMT+07:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Cron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /
On Apr 20, 2008, at 7:31 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One of the decisions will be what to do about documentation that has
already been contributed without a CLA.
I pulled down the revisions for these spaces: GMOxDOC10, GMOxDOC11,
GMOxDOC12, GMOxDOC20, GMOxDOC21, GMOxSITE
Report: http://peop
On Apr 21, 2008, at 6:42 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Apr 20, 2008, at 7:31 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
One of the decisions will be what to do about documentation that
has already been contributed without a CLA.
I pulled down the revisions for these spaces: GMOxDOC10, GMOxDOC11,
GMOxDOC12
On Apr 21, 2008, at 8:47 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
This may be a dumb question, but what happens if a user submitted
content and then submitted a CLA sometime later on. Are CLA's
retroactive or does the content submitted before a CLA need to be
resubmitted?
Definitely not a dumb question.
is wrong?
I did a manual look for CLA by last name for everyone who made any
edits. They might be there under a different name/spelling and
possibly I missed them.
-David
On Apr 21, 2008, at 10:00 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Apr 21, 2008, at 8:47 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
This may be a
So I improved the EJB integration so that there's a gbean for each
container type and the exact attributes for each container are
strongly typed gbean attributes.
Is it possible we can get someone to create a portlet that shows each
ejb container in the system and allows people to edit the
Wow, the screenshots on that issue look about perfect. Is this
something you'd want to hack on?
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
Maybe the code provided in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3811
can be used as a starting point?
-Donald
This should be fine. Trying to figure out what is not happening that
should be happening.
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
It would seem this change: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=698750
precipitated these failures. I started to notice the failures o
Think I got this cleared up. Doing a full build now.
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:27 PM, David Blevins wrote:
This should be fine. Trying to figure out what is not happening
that should be happening.
-David
On Sep 25, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
It would seem this change: http
On Sep 12, 2008, at 5:43 PM, David Blevins wrote:
I've added some functionality to OpenEJB trunk which has been
enabled in Geronimo trunk. Here's an overview of how it works:
DISCOVERY
What we have going on from a tech perspective is each server sends
and receives a multicast
+1
David
On Oct 13, 2008, at 7:56 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
http://people.apache.org/~gawor/staging-repo/specs/geronimo-
On Oct 22, 2008, at 6:56 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
Has anyone heard if JPA 2.0 will be part of JEE6?
Yes, it will.
If so, is Apache OpenJPA working on it?
It's definitely on their radar. Not sure if they've started.
-David
20090204.061437-1
snapshot.
Joe
Joe Bohn wrote:
I think these test failures might be related to the new OpenEJB
snapshot being published.
We passed all of the tests on 2/17 PM with server rev. 745178. We
then failed these same tests on 2/18 AM with server rev. 745486.
There were
On it.
-David
On Feb 24, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
I confirmed that these failures are at least impacted by an OpenEJB
change - rev. 745185. When I reverted this change and built OpenEJB
3.0.1-SNAPSHOT locally the tests all passed. So there is either
something wrong with the Ope
Do you want the OpenEJB 3.0.1 release now or would you prefer to wait
for the OpenJPA issue to be fixed?
-David
On Feb 27, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
I decided to wait a little longer before creating a 2.1.4 branch.
It will probably be mid next week before all of our dependencies ar
The JSR #318 Expert Group has put another Proposed Final Draft (PFD)
up for download:
Enterprise JavaBeans 3.1
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pfd/jsr318/index.html
Note this is still a draft and no the final spec.
Have a look at chapter 22 and see if anything feels familiar.
Ess
On Mar 11, 2009, at 1:09 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Mar 11, 2009, at 12:27 PM, David Blevins wrote:
The JSR #318 Expert Group has put another Proposed Final Draft
(PFD) up for download:
Enterprise JavaBeans 3.1
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pfd/jsr318/index.html
Note this
If at all possible it would be great to get a re-roll with these two:
r1215562 | dblevins | 2011-12-17 11:49:40 -0800 (Sat, 17 Dec 2011) | 2 lines
XBEAN-198: Support for proposed @javax.annotation.Metatype an
Hoping to get time to do an xbean release today or tomorrow.
Let me know if there's any reason to wait.
-David
n when the change into 3.0-beta
> branch.
>
> On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Shawn Jiang wrote:
> I would like to see a full run of geronimo tck result before the release.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Apr 5, 2012, at 6:53 PM, David Blevi
Alright, might be easier to just put the release up for vote and give people
the time to do what they need.
Rolling
-David
On Apr 10, 2012, at 9:45 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> It sounds like there's willingness, but I'm not sure who is doing what and
> when.
>
>
Binaries are up for consideration.
Here's the staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-032/org/apache/xbean/
I assume this is what was being asked for to run on the 3.0-beta branch.
The tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-
Excellent. My +1
-David
On Apr 10, 2012, at 11:13 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> Binaries are up for consideration.
>
> Here's the staging repo:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-032/org/apache/xbean/
>
> I assume this is what was
Ok, closing vote with 5 +1s and no other votes.
+1s:
Forrest Xia
David Blevins
Kevan Miller
Alan Cabrera
Shawn Jiang
-David
On Apr 10, 2012, at 11:13 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> Binaries are up for consideration.
>
> Here's the staging repo:
>
> https://repositor
+1
-David
On Jul 3, 2012, at 4:19 PM, Forrest Xia wrote:
> Hi Devs,
>
> With correction of repositoryList URL, here we have the 3rd release candidate
> for vote. Please help vote at your earliest convenient time.
>
> The server code up for vote is:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/rep
+1
-David
On Jan 31, 2013, at 7:57 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> I'm currently trying to fix a xbean compilation error on java7 platforms.
>
> Thus I stumbled over a very deep chain in our poms. There are 4
> layers of geronimo.genesis parent poms. And the top of them still point
> to
+1 for genesis
+1 for xbean. The presence of a snapshot repository declaration is fine, IMO.
I built both genesis and xbean tags against a clean maven repo and no snapshots
were downloaded.
-David
On Mar 11, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
> +1 for genesis.
>
> -1 for xbean. Unless
Anyone object if I roll an XBean 3.1.5 release?
-David
Ok, release rolled!
Binaries:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-086/
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/xbean/tags/xbean-3.15/
72 hours for voting! :)
-David
Ok. Here's my +1.
Vote passes with 8 +1s and no other votes:
David Blevins
Alan Cabrera
Romain Manni-Bucau
Dain Sundstrom
Hiram Chirino
Jean-Louis Monteiro
Jarek Gawor
Mark Struberg
-David
On Nov 6, 2013, at 8:55 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> Ok, release rolled!
>
> Binari
+1
-David
On Nov 25, 2013, at 7:53 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Good evening!
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing the geronimo jbatch 1.0 API.
>
> The API is already used in Apache BatchEE and passes the JSR-352 JBatch TCK.
>
> The staging repo is
> https://repository.apache.org/content
+1
On Mar 31, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm starting a vote for an xbean 3.17 release.
>
> The main change is the removing of asm3 and 4 shades and the
> replacement with asm5 one to be able to be compatible with java 8.
>
> Binaries:
>
> https://repository.apach
+1
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
On May 20, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm starting a vote for xbean 3.18 release.
>
> The main changes are:
> 1) removing asm5 from xbean-reflect
> 2) more co
Anyone still able to access this? For some reason this no longer shows up
in my Google Analytics account.
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:32 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> Setup google analytics on all our spaces and added everyone who's a
> committer who I could easily find a gmail
>
>
> 2014-05-26 23:21 GMT+02:00 David Blevins :
> Anyone still able to access this? For some reason this no longer shows up in
> my Google Analytics account.
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:32 PM, David Blevins
> wrote:
> Setup google analytics on all our space
On Aug 20, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> The main changes are:
[...]
> skip java.* classes since we'll not get their bytecode for sure
> (protected method if needed)
I'm not a fan of hard coding filtering inside the AnnotationFinder itself, so
+1 under the condition that we rem
101 - 200 of 1688 matches
Mail list logo
