That's fine. Can you update that, please? The stuff in tags/ are editable.
Hvae to get on a plane for OSCON right now..
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 03:12:56PM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
-1
This tag still contains references to SNAPSHOTs and hence things cannot
reliably be built from it.
.
-David
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 02:36:48PM -0500, David Blevins wrote:
Alright, we have closed all the JIRA issues and successfully ran all
the TCK tests.
Time for the final stuff
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 04:59:47PM -0500, David Blevins wrote:
THE FINAL STUFF
We have to run the TCK
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 07:16:23PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
no, you moved...
we never want to move branches, but copy to make tags, and never
modify the tags. That way, if we need to keep going on the branch,
we have it.
We agreed on this proceedure a month ago.
On Jul 4,
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:49:20PM -0700, David Jencks wrote:
I see dblevins has posted source and binary tar.gzs etc but I have
no idea how to produce them from a plain maven build. I consider
his publish_build.sh script unacceptable for releases because it
modifies what is checked out from
On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 09:04:22AM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 2, 2005, at 9:41 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 07:16:23PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
no, you moved...
we never want to move branches, but copy to make tags, and never
modify the tags
The tests are still running on David J's machine and should finish
sometime tomorrow. Since voting takes a day or so anyway, let's get
started and do them in parallel.
Vote:
Let's Release these binaries when the tests successfully complete.
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 06:15:52AM +0200, Jeremy Boynes (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-821?page=all ]
Jeremy Boynes reopened GERONIMO-821:
Both M4 and trunk say they produce rc5 version of JavaMail but the
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:19:38PM +0200, David Blevins (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-821?page=all ]
David Blevins resolved GERONIMO-821:
Resolution: Fixed
Darn, I meant for this to be 'Won't Fix'
Hold
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 07:57:56AM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
How often does the latest unstable get generated?
It's not automated. I tried forever yesterday to make a new one with
all the latest stuff, but Geronimo doesn't seem buildable to me
anymore. Can't quite figure out what is
, 2005, at 3:44 PM, David Blevins wrote:
It's there in a few forms, but not as far as I'd like to see it
go. OpenEJB implements a lot of these things and Jeremy's
bullets capture why pretty well. I've chatted a lot about it
with him and others at Gluecode. I've been beating poor Hiram
On Aug 2, 2005, at 1:03 AM, David Jencks wrote:
I wonder if we could spend a little time thinking about stuff we
might like to discard.
I think the geronimo itests modules are good candidates. It would
be great to have integration tests, but I don't think what is there
is a good
On Aug 17, 2005, at 9:45 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
[X] I like this and do not wish to see a separate ACL
for new people working on the subproject
Late vote, crazy busy, sorry.
Just to be on the clear side since this vote took place somewhere in
the context of a donation, I'm not
On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:35 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Jeff Genender wrote:
I'll start...
A) Must haves
Tomcat binary.
B) Nice to haves
Tomcat passing the TCK.
If we're releasing the binary then having it pass the TCK is also a
must have (for consistency at least, never mind the legal
On Aug 24, 2005, at 4:13 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:07 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:35 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Jeff Genender wrote:
I'll start...
A) Must haves
Tomcat binary.
B) Nice to haves
Tomcat passing the TCK.
If we're
On Aug 24, 2005, at 4:47 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:31 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 4:13 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:07 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Let's proceed with our Tomcat distribution as we have done with
our non
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:10 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:00 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Excellent point. I think that shipping an experimental
configuration system as the default is bit risky. As a long term
idea, I think that a binary configuration system would be a good
On Aug 27, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 27, 2005, at 10:33 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Jeff Genender wrote:
2) What do we want as part of the M5 release. I ask that we
break this down into A) Must haves, B) Nice to haves, C)
Fuhgetaboutit.
A) Must haves
*
On Aug 30, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
I want to propose that tomorrow (8/31) at midnite PDT, the list for
new M5 features will be closed, and we can begin to agree on the
final QA cut and M5 release date...this is with a 36:45 hour notice.
If anyone has a problem with this,
There was some discussion in M4 on possibly J2EE certifying that
release or maybe M5. Can we get a clear consensus that:
1) this is what we want to do with M5
2) what is the ideal timeframe for completing that (in weeks, don't
say soon).
Some discussion has occurred on how we want to role out the console
in M5.
On Aug 26, 2005, at 5:54 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
So I updated the console status on the Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/geronimo/Web_Console
Basically, there's a lot of work yet to go. I've put some work
into
define what ASAP or soon should be
ideally.
-David
Aaron
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, David Blevins wrote:
There was some discussion in M4 on possibly J2EE certifying that
release or maybe M5. Can we get a clear consensus that:
1) this is what we want to do with M5
2) what is the ideal
On Aug 30, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 30, 2005, at 3:37 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Aug 27, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Aug 27, 2005, at 10:33 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Runtime, please? :)
We covered this in M4. We agreed
On Aug 27, 2005, at 11:41 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
How about a must have to implement GBeanName according to the
previous notes on the mailing list?
On Aug 27, 2005, at 11:36 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Does this include modifying all code to use GBeanName instead of
object name? []
On Aug 30, 2005, at 1:17 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
2) what is the ideal timeframe for completing that (in weeks,
don't say soon).
I'll try to do the research re what is involved beyond the
automated test suite.
Great. We can make a list of steps required and factor it in.
I
On Aug 30, 2005, at 2:05 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, David Blevins wrote:
It seems this fizzled out into a partial agreement that this was too
big for this release.
Is this ok with everyone?
Uh, no. I think we should make GBeanName satisfactory, and put
all
Ok, this is just an attempt to get people to voice their expectations
about the release in general, not in regards to any feature or item
in the release.
1) If we could deliver M5 in ___ weeks, I would consider that a
complete success.
2) I would not like M5 to take more than ___
On Aug 30, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, David Blevins wrote:
I think the full conversion of all ObjectNames to GBeanNames
and
all queries to GBeanQuery's can wait for post-M5.
Ok, you're confusing me. The message post-M5 is exactly where I
thought
On Aug 30, 2005, at 4:24 PM, Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 8/30/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) If we could deliver M5 in _2__ weeks, I would consider that a
complete success.
2) I would not like M5 to take more than _3__ weeks.
I don't think that taking any longer than three
Fixed.
On Sep 6, 2005, at 5:23 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Attempting to download activeio-2.0-20050905.jar.
231K downloaded
build:end:
build:start:
default:
java:prepare-filesystem:
[mkdir] Created dir: /home/jeremy/geronimo/trunk/modules/
security/target/classes
java:compile:
Should be fixed now. Did a 'clean default' build with tests.
-David
On Sep 6, 2005, at 11:14 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Did you rebuild? I'm still seeing a lot of failures.
David Blevins wrote:
Fixed.
On Sep 6, 2005, at 5:23 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Attempting to download activeio-2.0
On Sep 6, 2005, at 1:58 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Sachin Patel wrote:
Rather then throwing everything in the eclipse-plugin folder
could we organize the contents down into the following structure?
A .../trunk/modules/eclipse/plugins/ folder that contains the
following projects...
geronimo from published openejb snapshots
Let me know if you find anything else.
-David
On Sep 6, 2005, at 1:08 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
Should be fixed now. Did a 'clean default' build with tests.
I did a m:rebuild all and it failed to run the openejb itests
When I
On Sep 6, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
What is the point of the frozen list? At this point, it
doesn't appear to have stopped development of things that aren't
on the list.
The list for what we are agreeing to go into M5. If something
isn't on
is the QA Cut date
David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 6, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
What is the point of the frozen list? At this point, it
doesn't appear to have stopped development of things that
aren't on the list.
The list for what we
Great. A very long time we talked about doing this but there was
pushback as it was against policy to ship non-final releases from /
www/www.apache.org/dist/, which is mirrored. So we put them on /www/
cvs.apache.org/dist/ instead.
I've moved over all our milestones to
Thank you, David! This one was kicking my butt.
-David
On Sep 9, 2005, at 3:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
djencks 2005/09/09 18:35:01
Added: modules/itests/src/var/config config.list
Log:
fix itests to work with new configurations
Revision ChangesPath
1.1
FYI, doesn't seem to be in any of the repos in our list anymore.
+
| Executing default Geronimo :: Console :: Standard Portlets
| Memory: 51M/62M
+
[...]
Attempting to download dwr-1.0.jar.
WARNING: Failed to
It seems as though our repo list is messed up. Only ibiblio is
getting checked.
-David
On Sep 12, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
I put it on cvs.apache.org a week or two ago. I'll check into it
tonight.
Aaron
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, David Blevins wrote:
FYI, doesn't seem
Never mind, this turned out to be the box didn't have maven 1.0.2, so
our repo list from etc/project.properties was ignored.
-David
On Sep 12, 2005, at 1:14 PM, David Blevins wrote:
It seems as though our repo list is messed up. Only ibiblio is
getting checked.
-David
On Sep 12, 2005
Just to remind everyone, svn doesn't have branches or tags and
nothing is ever gone or deleted, everything is still around, and at
any point in time we can patch an old release if we feel it's really
necessary.
-David
Jeff's been traveling around the world speaking, so I'm helping him
out with the creating the M5 copy (cvs term: branch).
Here is the command for those interested:
svn copy https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk https://
svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.0-M5-QA
-David
In the future, could we drop QA? You know, make it just the
1.0-M6 branch. Again, more important once we have release we're
committed to maintain instead of replace, but I think the QA in
the name contributes to the confusion over whether it should be
deleted or not after the target
On Sep 19, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
As for the confusion of branches and tags, Dain, can you clarify if
your confusion is caused strictly by this being a milestone release?
[rearranged]
But of course there is no M4.0 and M4.1 so the whole issue is kind
of muddy regarding
+1
As I've said during M4, Alright, IMHO, we've outgrown milestones
See Thinking beyond 1.0, http://www.mail-archive.com/
dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg06953.html
Let's do this!
-David
On Sep 19, 2005, at 5:14 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Before we discuss this to death, I propose:
* we drop
Ahh, guys, you do realize that 0.9.x is actually backwards from 1.0-FOO.
If anything, can we at least agree that math will be part of our
version numbers?
-David
On Sep 19, 2005, at 6:08 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Man. I agree with everyone here, a little :)
I'd love to see the
Alright guys, we're talking over each other again and are too far
down in the details.
This entire thing started as Geir wanted to do 1.0-M5.1, 1.0-M5.2,
1.0-M5.3, ... 1.0-M5.N while we all work on 1.0-M6 (or whatever).
That's not a bad goal, but we have to agree on what we are going for
On Sep 19, 2005, at 10:53 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Sep 20, 2005, at 12:50 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Alright guys, we're talking over each other again and are too far
down in the details.
This entire thing started as Geir wanted to do 1.0-M5.1, 1.0-M5.2,
1.0-M5.3, ... 1.0-M5.N
I'd also like to move the maven-geronimo-plugin (aka, geronimo-
deployment-plugin). I can't see any reason we should keep releasing
it with every geronimo version.
-David
On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:28 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
The recent emails got me thinking about cleaning up the trunk
On Sep 20, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On 9/20/2005 10:16 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Alan,
Beautifully said.
Thanks. Did anyone notice the pretty picture that I attached?
Beautifully drawn.
+1 to your description of what we should do.
-David
There is still debate on what we should do with M5.
-David
On Sep 20, 2005, at 12:54 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
Is there a reason this fix only went into trunk and not 1.0-M5?
Are we planning on recutting M5 once all the TCKs pass?
-Donald
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: ammulder
+1 Accept the DayTrader donation into the project
-1 Do not create Applications subproject. Leave in trunk.
On Sep 20, 2005, at 4:28 PM, John Sisson wrote:
(Keep it simple for now. Review this later when Geronimo is more
stable. I think
it is too early to try to have applications with
Built you an unstable build:
http://cvs.apache.org/dist/geronimo/unstable/1.0-290902
That's head (trunk) as of 12:20am. It took me a bit to get this out
as we've changed things up a bit since the last nightly.
Hope that helps!
-David
On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:50 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
configuration
data across upgrades or patches.
Here are a few snippets of that argument, completely biased to my
perspective:
On May 13, 2005, at 3:54 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 03:42:58PM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Solving the compatibility problem
Ditto, sorry. (Still not a fan of serialized configs :)
-David
On Sep 23, 2005, at 9:47 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
My bad Jeremy. You are correct. I latched onto serialization and
immediately went to configuration. I realized the error of my ways
this morning when you mentioned the
LAST ISSUES
- Easy switching from Jetty - Tomcat
- Snapshots (Javamail Axis=Dims, jUDDI Scout=Geir,
ServiceMix=Hiram, tmpOrb=Dain)
- Version number of some sort in the schemas?
Is there anything else people think *must* be there to ship?
THE FINAL STUFF
Again, we have to run the
? what do i need to do?
Axis - working on one last problem in code generation.
-- dims
On 9/26/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LAST ISSUES
- Easy switching from Jetty - Tomcat
- Snapshots (Javamail Axis=Dims, jUDDI Scout=Geir,
ServiceMix=Hiram, tmpOrb=Dain)
- Version number
thanks!
On Sep 26, 2005, at 3:59 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I'll go take care of it.
On Sep 26, 2005, at 6:12 PM, Aaron Mulder (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-627?
page=comments#action_12330522 ]
Aaron Mulder commented on GERONIMO-627:
is reversed
at some time in the future?
- Finally, how are applications that must be pre-deployed in each
container managed (for example example the web console)?
Joe
David Blevins wrote:
LAST ISSUES
- Easy switching from Jetty - Tomcat
- Snapshots (Javamail Axis=Dims, jUDDI Scout=Geir
It makes me wonder why there is no 'svn patch' command
-David
On Sep 26, 2005, at 6:54 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Will do, thanks...its a wonder there is a pesky move command then :)
Matt
David Blevins (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1025?page=all
On Sep 26, 2005, at 2:30 PM, David Blevins wrote:
THE FINAL STUFF
2. create release notes
I've taken a quick crack at the release notes, but they still need
some love from others. The Significant Changes Since the M4
Release probably has some stuff that should be added
On Sep 26, 2005, at 2:30 PM, David Blevins wrote:
THE FINAL STUFF
1. clean the jira
So we're down to a handful of Jira issues to lockup before we can
finish the remaining M5 dance moves.
GERONIMO-1012 - Tomcat integration does not set a subject in an
unsecured web module in a secured
FYI, don't forget to check these fixes into the M5 branch as well.
-David
On Sep 27, 2005, at 8:57 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 26, 2005, at 2:30 PM, David Blevins wrote:
THE FINAL STUFF
1. clean the jira
So we're down to a handful of Jira issues to lockup before we can
finish
in the future that the Izpack stuff be run from a
maven plugin and integrated in the build and work by unpacking or
including the zip distribution, but am willing to use what we have
for M5. David Blevins is working on building an installer. With
luck it will be available shortly.
thanks
david
Thanks
david jencks
On Oct 2, 2005, at 10:15 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Ta-da!
http://people.apache.org/~dblevins/geronimo-installer.jar
-David
issues
* A BIG HUGE thanks for David Blevins and David Jencks for working
with me into the wee-hours of the night, testing and getting
Geronimo to pass the TCK tests for both the Jetty *and* Tomcat
containers. These guys really stepped up and didn't leave me
hanging with Tomcat issues for my
.
* Dims for getting the patches into Axis.
* Gianni for fixing up TranQL and CMP issues
* A BIG HUGE thanks for David Blevins and David Jencks for
working with me into the wee-hours of the night, testing and
getting Geronimo to pass the TCK tests for both the Jetty *and*
Tomcat containers
/downloads.html page. That gives you the
most freedom to change links later.
Cheers,
Brett
On 10/5/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 4, 2005, at 6:38 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
We're really excited about this release, and got a little ahead of
ourselves. We need to let the code
On Oct 4, 2005, at 8:24 PM, David Jencks wrote:
Stefan Schmidt has found our first configuration problem in M5,
namely that the listener name in the ejb builder in
config.tomcat.xml points half to tomcat and half to jetty. This is
easy to fix by hand (change JettyWebContainer to
On Oct 10, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
I think we should discuss if we want to move to confluence as our
wiki
I think the move to confluence is an excellent idea and we should
definitely start discussing this. Looking at the current wiki, I
think
On Oct 11, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Bill Stoddard wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Oct 10, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Sachin Patel wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
I think we should discuss if we want to move to confluence as
our wiki
I think the move to confluence is an excellent idea and we
On Oct 12, 2005, at 7:37 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
here's my suggestion: How about building an EJB 3.0 Container like
JBoss or Oracle already do?
Hi Oliver,
Geronimo uses OpenEJB which will definitely implement EJB 3. We've
been a little resource drained working on J2EE 1.4
On Oct 12, 2005, at 11:57 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
David,
This is the compromise we reached...Can you please send me the
message id's of the messages in question? I don't remember seeing this
on the infra mailing list.
Don't have anything official for you. We've talked about and voted
On Oct 12, 2005, at 1:53 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
So it looks like step one it to establish the Geronimo zone.
Geir can you ask infrastructure to create the Geronimo zone, and
once they are done, you will need to create an account for me.
Also do any other committers want to help set this
It's all fine. This zone per PMC concept sounds like the answer to a
lot of things.
Should be just what the doctor ordered :)
-David
On Oct 12, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Nope. It wasn't blessed by infra folks :(
-- dims
On 10/12/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Definitely! Pretty incredible.
I tweaked the page a bit to use {code} and {code:xml} in the
respective places so the syntax highlighting kicks in. Let me know
if that's not cool and I'll switch it back to {noformat}.
Nice work!
-David
On Oct 12, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Dain Sundstrom
On Oct 12, 2005, at 3:08 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:
I'll look into this.. Also, can someone help clarify the line
between reusing open source and providing unique project identity.
Basically, I'm wondering if it makes any sense to reuse the Tomcat
examples (along with a few small
On Oct 12, 2005, at 1:53 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
So it looks like step one it to establish the Geronimo zone.
Geir can you ask infrastructure to create the Geronimo zone, and
once they are done, you will need to create an account for me.
Geir, any word from infrastructure on the zone?
Right, Dims said the same thing.
On Oct 12, 2005, at 1:50 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Oct 12, 2005, at 11:57 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
David,
This is the compromise we reached...Can you please send me the
message id's of the messages in question? I don't remember seeing
+1 on #19
On Oct 18, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
+1 from me.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
+1 from me to ratify. PMC members should vote here.
Also, we'll need a contribution agreement from Epiqtech. I'll
take that as a todo.
geir
On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:06 PM, Matt Hogstrom
+/**
+ *
+ * Copyright 2004, 2005 The Apache Software Foundation or its
licensors, as applicable.
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the License);
+ * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+ * You may obtain a copy of the License at
Is
I don't have the access to poke at the list, but one thing to try is
to check out the full headers of the email and see that shows up in
the Delivered-To: header(s).
That should tell you which address is subscribed.
-David
On Oct 18, 2005, at 8:34 PM, Lu Li wrote:
Hi, I would like to
On Oct 13, 2005, at 12:11 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Even if we can't do Confluence, I'm going to ask for two zones, one
for general use, and one for TCK use.
Any update on the zones?
-David
On Oct 19, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Gianny Damour wrote:
On 20/10/2005 1:56 PM, David Jencks wrote:
I've been working on building geronimo using the packaging and
assembly plugins. This works fine except for the unmanageable
dependencies. The project for the assemby plugin to work on
Since testing/building is a really hard thing in Geronimo and the
large community of projects surrounding it, Dain and I decided it was
time to take action and put our own $$ on the table to help.
Projects like Geronimo, OpenEJB and ActiveMQ have provided us with so
much opportunity, we
Matt, Gianny, did we catch you in the middle of a checkin?
http://ci.gbuild.org/continuum/servlet/continuum/target/
ProjectBuild.vm?view=ProjectBuildbuildId=141id=8
If so, just click the Build Now link next to tranql on this page:
On Oct 26, 2005, at 2:20 AM, Lyndon Samson wrote:
Just a thought, RSS is a little friendlier than emails for reporting!
That's a really cool idea! You should add a feature request for it
in the Continuum JIRA (somewhere in here http://maven.apache.org/
continuum/index.html)
Those guys
OSs on various
processors and VMs. I took a brief look and it doesn't actually seem
like it's that hard.
-David
Regards,
Barry
On 10/26/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since testing/building is a really hard thing in Geronimo and the
large community of projects surrounding
.
Aaron
On 10/26/05, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 26, 2005, at 2:11 AM, Barry van Someren wrote:
Wow, awesome!
Thanks to all involved in bringing this new infrastructure.
A big you're welcome and a modest no problem followed by a heart-
felt my pleasure :)
So are we going
On Oct 26, 2005, at 6:40 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Nice! You guys rock!! This was extremely generous of all parties
and I want to offer a personal thanks for your warm hearts in giving.
Thanks to Aaron and Charriot as well. I need to throw in another box
just so I can tie with Aaron :-P
As I spelled Chariot wrong and everyone else got a URL with their
company name here goes again
- Chariot Solutions (http://www.chariotsolutions.com)
Your website got a lot nicer looking than the last time I looked at it.
-David
On Oct 26, 2005, at 8:33 PM, David Blevins wrote:
You
What do you guys think about a gbuild subproject?
I'd really like at least a category in jira and at least a spot in
svn where we can check in scripts and docco. We could move the
scripts directory I created months back into it and work on cleaning
and organizing this stuff. I guess I'd
to help, but my unix skills are weak. I'm personally hoping that
David Blevins (hint) and Jeff Genender volunteer (hint) as both of
them have mad unix admin skills :)
I think we should apply the same rules to the geronimo-tck zone
except that only NDA signers would get access.
-dain
On Oct 28, 2005, at 1:29 PM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I was thinking that it might be worthwhile to have a regular weekly
conference call for those on the dev list. It would not be
mandatory at
all but we could all put it on our calendars and use it as a time to
You know, I think that would be really great. Having everyone in one
spot would be awesome.
I can't speak for all of the OpenEJB community, but my +1 to that
idea. I'll bring it up on the list.
-David
On Oct 29, 2005, at 12:13 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Huge +1!
I can't speak for the
On Oct 29, 2005, at 4:54 PM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
I think I was the only one strongly opposed, and I was
expressing my opinion based on experience. Anything that
excludes people as a matter of principle
FYI, I'm attempting to upgrade (install anew) to continuum 1.0 on
stan. Doesn't seem to be going well. If I can't get it running in
the next couple hours, I'm just going to bring our old install (1.0-
beta1) back online.
-David
Can we kill this old branch?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.0-M5
We have a tag for it here.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/tags/1_0_M5
And can we also agree that we don't leave branches hanging around
after every release unless that is planned to be an
I'm coming in kind of late on this one (been fighting with continuum
all day)... but it seems like the conversation somehow got polarized
between remove vs. keep and the proposal is simply to move them (as
far as I can tell).
So, here is my thoughts ...
We have to move old binaries off
On Oct 31, 2005, at 9:48 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote, On 10/31/2005 7:09 PM:
A milestone represents a significant point in the development.
Until there's a released version that is feature- and bug-
compatible with what they're doing, a milestone reference
is
FYI, this was just a test and an attempt to moderate through the
address. The build is fine.
-David
On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:04 PM, continuum wrote:
Online report : http://ci.gbuild.org/continuum/target/
ProjectBuild.vm/view/ProjectBuild/id/1/buildId/16
Build statistics:
State: Failed
701 - 800 of 1537 matches
Mail list logo
