Fwd: openEJB fail on second test

2012-02-20 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
it is the second time we have such an issue, maybe we should scan junit/testng annotations (with a good catch if it is not available at the classpath) to add automatically these tests to the managed beans? - Romain -- Forwarded message -- From: amber Date: 2012/2/20 Subject: Re

Re: Build broken

2012-02-20 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
is properties.setProperty("OpenEJB.server.http.level", "FINE"); ok? - Romain 2012/2/19 David Blevins > > On Feb 19, 2012, at 1:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > > for logging: properties as usually? > > Possible you could write a short doc on that for the testing scenario? > > I have never

Re: Build broken

2012-02-20 Thread David Blevins
That looks good, though we might want to separate logging stuff from regular properties (i.e. not have them start with "openejb"). It would be neat if we could easily override any log "category" like we could with our log4j overriding ability. Maybe something like "logging.level. = " -David

Re: Build broken

2012-02-20 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
done something like it, it should work now - Romain 2012/2/20 David Blevins > That looks good, though we might want to separate logging stuff from > regular properties (i.e. not have them start with "openejb"). It would be > neat if we could easily override any log "category" like we could w

Re: openEJB fail on second test

2012-02-20 Thread Alan D. Cabrera
I think that it's a bad practice to automagically change the explicit behavior of tests. If a test needs to explicitly state a fact about itself w/ an explicit annotation to get it to pass then that's what it should do. Regards, Alan On Feb 20, 2012, at 12:07 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

comm...@openejb.apache.org seems to be down

2012-02-20 Thread Alan D. Cabrera
I'm not getting any commit messages. Is anyone else getting any? More specifically there are build failures and no corresponding emails to the developers. Regards, Alan

Re: openEJB fail on second test

2012-02-20 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
we don't change the behavior of the test if it is not asked but if it is asked we could be ready. - Romain 2012/2/20 Alan D. Cabrera > I think that it's a bad practice to automagically change the explicit > behavior of tests. If a test needs to explicitly state a fact about itself > w/ an exp

Re: comm...@openejb.apache.org seems to be down

2012-02-20 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
i have issue with the svn itself so i guess the commit list too but i saw your commits (last one about URLs). - Romain 2012/2/20 Alan D. Cabrera > I'm not getting any commit messages. Is anyone else getting any? > > More specifically there are build failures and no corresponding emails to > t

Annotation scanning plugin

2012-02-20 Thread David Blevins
We've chatted occasionally on creating a scanning.xml file where people could setup includes and excludes and, overall, optimize classpath scanning. Romain is already busy hacking of course :) Here's the idea for a plugin to effectively do the most expensive part of scanning in advance:

Re: Annotation scanning plugin

2012-02-20 Thread Alan D. Cabrera
Neat idea. I would include the configuration information in the scan.xml so that tooling would know the criteria used in the scan and decide whether or not to scan for other annotations or inplementations. I would also put the scan.xml file in some package specific place like META-INF/org/apac

Google+ "following"

2012-02-20 Thread David Blevins
Was going to try and add everyone to the circle of the Apache TomEE Google+ page, but it appears that Google doesn't allow that until you are following the Apache TomEE page. So if you want to be listed in the "Team Members" circle, you need to first add Apache TomEE to your circles: https:/

Re: Google+ "following"

2012-02-20 Thread dsh
Done... I hope so... sometimes Google+ seems to be "not so intuitive"... On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:47 AM, David Blevins wrote: > Was going to try and add everyone to the circle of the Apache TomEE Google+ > page, but it appears that Google doesn't allow that until you are following > the Apach

Re: Annotation scanning plugin

2012-02-20 Thread Mohammad Nour El-Din
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > Neat idea. > > I would include the configuration information in the scan.xml so that > tooling would know the criteria used in the scan and decide whether or not > to scan for other annotations or inplementations. > > I would also put the

Re: Annotation scanning plugin

2012-02-20 Thread Mohammad Nour El-Din
I have one concern, still by having an XML generated and we still like reading only information about such classes and the overhead of reading XML in memory in case we have a large one(s). Why not generate a code out of that which is compiled with the jar or even added to the an existing jar which