[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4705?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13627726#comment-13627726
]
Justin Ross commented on QPID-4705:
---
Reviewed by Robbie. Approved for 0.22.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4725?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13627728#comment-13627728
]
Justin Ross commented on QPID-4725:
---
Rejected for 0.22. Unless it's an important
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2789?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Rob Godfrey updated QPID-2789:
--
Fix Version/s: 0.23
prevent additional message enqueues once a queue has begun to be deleted
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2789?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Rob Godfrey resolved QPID-2789.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Committed as : http://svn.apache.org/r1466482
prevent additional
Hi, everyone. We've recently been discussing the components of our
project in a couple different contexts. This is a proposal to take
the outcomes of those discussion and apply them to how Qpid is
organized.
Thanks for taking a look,
Justin
## Related discussions
-
Ken Giusti created QPID-4732:
Summary: Python client qpid.connection object's string conversion
fails with IPv6 addresses
Key: QPID-4732
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4732
Project: Qpid
On 8 April 2013 22:40, Justin Ross justin.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com
wrote:
The other changes (which I made) I can take or leave... the GUI change is
obviously trivial, but clearly not a blocker. The SASL for AMQP 1.0
would
I'm +1 this... Obviously we need to understand better the amount of work to
achieve the separation of the components... but if this were in place then
we wouldn't be facing the sort of issues we are currently experiencing with
the 0.22 release which would strongly benefit from not having the
I have a patch in QPID-4729 that really ought to go into 0.22 since without it
cmake fails.
That said, I'm supplying the patch without actually doing a source tarball
construction, a subsequent cmake build that produces the unistalll, an install,
and finally an uninstall that proves it works.
+1 on this.
Having the flexibility to have individual release cycles for each component
will be huge advantage for us.
However as Justin mentioned, we shouldn't rule out a Qpid wide release
perhaps once a year or so.
From a users perspective this is a great thing to have, bcos all the
components
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
OK - these would seem to be sensible policies to apply in future... but
obviously they've not been clearly defined or consistently applied in the
past.
Not clearly defined, yes. I think they have, however, been
Alan Conway created QPID-4733:
-
Summary: Fix cmake installation of init scripts
Key: QPID-4733
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4733
Project: Qpid
Issue Type: Bug
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Justin Ross jr...@apache.org wrote:
What would your thoughts on a way forward be?
Well, there's the 0.22.1 path, which isn't addressed here. I don't
think there's anything wrong with doing that.
It's clear that you are willing to own the outcome, so in the
On 10 April 2013 16:45, Justin Ross jr...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com
wrote:
OK - these would seem to be sensible policies to apply in future... but
obviously they've not been clearly defined or consistently applied in the
past.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10398/
---
Review request for qpid and Darryl Pierce.
Description
---
QPID-4733: Fix
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 09:55:22AM -0400, Justin Ross wrote:
Hi, everyone. We've recently been discussing the components of our
project in a couple different contexts. This is a proposal to take
the outcomes of those discussion and apply them to how Qpid is
organized.
+1
--
Darryl L.
Andrew Stitcher created QPID-4734:
-
Summary: Release builds fail on GCC 4.4.7 / Boost 1.41
Key: QPID-4734
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4734
Project: Qpid
Issue Type: Bug
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4734?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13628120#comment-13628120
]
Andrew Stitcher commented on QPID-4734:
---
I concluded that turning the warning off
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4734?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrew Stitcher resolved QPID-4734.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 0.23
Fixed in r1466615
Release
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10398/#review18974
---
Ship it!
It should be rebased on the latest tip. But otherwise
This is a simple build fix which allows the code to build without error
on RHEL6, I think it is very low risk.
Andrew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
Chuck Rolke created QPID-4735:
-
Summary: C++ Broker ACL file size/count limit check bug when no
value declared by user
Key: QPID-4735
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4735
Project: Qpid
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13628159#comment-13628159
]
Alan Conway commented on QPID-4733:
---
Fixed on trunk:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13628166#comment-13628166
]
Alan Conway commented on QPID-4733:
---
Reviewed by Darryl Pierce
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4722?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jimmy Jones resolved QPID-4722.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 0.22
qpid-cpp-0.22-rc1 doesnt compile on RHEL6
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I was about to ask if you could elaborate on what you meant in my other
reply when I saw this mail arive to answer my question.
At this point we don't really anticpate requiring extra time in the overall
schedule
+1 from me as well. I think this would be a good improvement on the
existing structure and benefit everyone by allowing for schedules more
tailored to the specific components, and in turn enable us to better meet
the needs of their users.
We would need to investigate how some of the changes might
Steve, do you plan to use the uninstall facility? That went in after
Beta, and subsequently had a couple problems. I'm inclined to instead
revert the uninstall change, which should also return the cmake build
to working.
Justin
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4735?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Chuck Rolke resolved QPID-4735.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 0.23
Fixed at Committed revision 1466652.
Exposing the issue
On 10 April 2013 21:30, Justin Ross justin.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I was about to ask if you could elaborate on what you meant in my other
reply when I saw this mail arive to answer my question.
At this point
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 April 2013 21:30, Justin Ross justin.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I was about to ask if you could elaborate on what you meant in my
... but since we are encouraging users to use the cmake build mechanism, the
uninstall feature may be important to allow more people to try cmake.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Huston
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 5:14 PM
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Subject: RE: Request for inclusion
32 matches
Mail list logo
