Re: [VOTE] - Struts2 Portlet Archetype 2.1.6

+1 GA On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Nils-Helge Garli Hegvik wrote: > Okey, giving this another shot! > > The Struts 2 Portlet Archetype 2.1.6 is ready for testing. To test it, > point Maven 2 to the staging repository and follow the documentation > at http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/displa

Re: [VOTE] - Struts2 Portlet Archetype 2.1.6

hmm, just created a project from the archetype to check against LR 5.2/Tomcat6, but it does not compile... /Users/rene/DevHome/Struts2/portletblank/src/test/java/net/itneering/struts/JettyPlutoLauncher.java:[3,28] package org.apache.pluto.core does not exist /Users/rene/DevHome/Struts2/portletbla

Re: [VOTE] - Struts2 Portlet Archetype 2.1.6

OK, got it. If the pluto-embedded profile is enabled, it builds correctly. Without it fails in test compile phase. I'm wondering if it would be better to put the JettyPlutoLauncher in a test-embedded dir besides java and test, which will be used as additional test sources dir when the pluto-embedd

Re: [VOTE] - Struts2 Portlet Archetype 2.1.6

Hm...you're right. I'm always using the pluto-embedded profile, so I didn't catch the error. I need to restructure things a bit so it also works without profiles. I'm downgrading my vote to -1 since packaging the war with the embedded profile also includes a lot of jars that shouldn't be there (por

Re: getting to 2.1.7

Does anyone want to take a shot at the 2.1.7 build? I can do it next week if nobody steps up. It should be straight forward now :) musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Looking through JIRA, there are a few issues left for 2.1.7, but once the > portlet archetype goes

Re: getting to 2.1.7

2009/4/26 Musachy Barroso : > Does anyone want to take a shot at the 2.1.7 build? I can do it next > week if nobody steps up. It should be straight forward now :) I can try during this week, if I get my account details ;-) Regards -- Lukasz http://www.lenart.org.pl/ ---

Re: getting to 2.1.7

On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:21:02 am Musachy Barroso wrote: > Does anyone want to take a shot at the 2.1.7 build? I can do it next > week if nobody steps up. It should be straight forward now :) > > musachy > I don't mind doing it tomorrow, but I was hoping someone (Nils?) would take a quick look

RE: getting to 2.1.7

Anything we can help with? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100- - +1

Re: getting to 2.1.7

WW-3087 would be nice to get done. WW-2759 doesn't need to hold the release, and WW-2827 need more information to be done, so I suggest it is pushed forward to the next release. I'll try to get WW-3087 done tomorrow. Nils-H On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 A

Re: getting to 2.1.7

We've got the JIRA issues pretty well cleared up... Nils volunteered to try to push the last one out. I'm going to start working on the source to prepare it for release. One that that you can help with (I assume by "we" you meant non-committers) is to try the release candidate after I build it

WW-2394 really implemented?

Hi. I see that https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2394 is closed with resolution=implemented with a comment referring to the Convention-plugin. I cannot se how it's possible with the Convention-plugin to map different names to an action using annotations. Say I have UserAction and want

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 02:22:50 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > Hi. > I see that https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2394 is closed with > resolution=implemented with a comment referring to the Convention-plugin. I > cannot se how it's possible with the Convention-plugin to map different >

RE: getting to 2.1.7

> -Original Message- > From: Wes Wannemacher > Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 14:20 > To: Jason Pyeron > Cc: 'Struts Developers List' > Subject: Re: getting to 2.1.7 > > We've got the JIRA issues pretty well cleared up... Nils > volunteered to try to push the last one out. I'm going to

struts-master pom release

Looking through the list of tasks, it looks like we need to release struts- master... This brings up a few questions, 1) Do we do a vote, etc. to get this released... 2)Should we wait for upcoming changes to complete to avoid doing another release in a week or two? Knowing another committer is

Re: struts-master pom release

1) It has been discussed before, I don't think we vote on poms/maven artifacts 2) do you mean the maven archetypes? If so, I think we should wait if Lukasz can take care of them, we have been pushing them around for a while musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Lookin

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 08:29:57 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 02:22:50 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > Hi. > > I see that https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2394 is closed with > > resolution=implemented with a comment referring to the Convention-plugin. I > > cann

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sunday 26 April 2009 03:12:24 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > 1) It has been discussed before, I don't think we vote on poms/maven > artifacts 2) do you mean the maven archetypes? If so, I think we should > wait if Lukasz can take care of them, we have been pushing them around for > a while > No, f

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

The annotation was allowed to be applied to classes in 2.1.6, but it was ignored. For 2.1.7 it will be allowed only in methods.There are no advantages in having multiple @Action annotations at the class level, instead of the method level. musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Andreas Joseph Kr

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 03:18:56 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 08:29:57 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > > > The @Action annotation is meant to point to methods, and you can do it > > like - > > > > @Actions( { > > @Action(/mynamespace/showuser), > > @Action(/mynamespace

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 09:24:38 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > The annotation was allowed to be applied to classes in 2.1.6, but it > was ignored. For 2.1.7 it will be allowed only in methods.There are no > advantages in having multiple @Action annotations at the class level, > instead of the method

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

But you always map a url to a method, an action is not executed, a method is. Even if you don't specify a method, "execute" will be used by default. musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 09:24:38 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: >> The annotation

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:10:29 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > But you always map a url to a method, an action is not executed, a > method is. Even if you don't specify a method, "execute" will be used > by default. I like the methods to be a parameter (&method:next=true for calling MyAction.nex()

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:10:29 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > But you always map a url to a method, an action is not executed, a > method is. Even if you don't specify a method, "execute" will be used > by default. I know, but "execute" only works as a default-method (list some entities for exampl

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:27:28 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:10:29 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > > But you always map a url to a method, an action is not executed, a > > method is. Even if you don't specify a method, "execute" will be used > > by default. > > I like th

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

There is a property for that already, http://struts.apache.org/2.1.6/docs/action-configuration.html#ActionConfiguration-DynamicMethodInvocation musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:27:28 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: >> On Sunday 26 April

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:32:43 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:27:28 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:10:29 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > > > But you always map a url to a method, an action is not executed, a > > > method is. Even if you don't spe

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:43:42 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:32:43 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:27:28 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:10:29 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > > > > But you always map a url to a met

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:48:33 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:43:42 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:32:43 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:27:28 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:10:29

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:53:23 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:48:33 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:43:42 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:32:43 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:27:28

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Musachy Barroso wrote: > 1) It has been discussed before, I don't think we vote on poms/maven > artifacts Yes, this has been discussed before. It does need a vote. Every release needs to be voted on by the PMC. See the thread on releasing Annotations 1.0.4 for

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:57:59 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:53:23 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:48:33 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:43:42 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > > > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:32:43

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

In fact we don't have to use that setting at all, as the DMI magic happens at execution time, not configuration building time. To enable this, we only need to enable @Action to be applied to classes, and use "execute" as the method, which would *have* to be in the class. I would say this is a valid

Re: struts-master pom release

Yeah Martin is right, see http://struts.markmail.org/search/?q=[VOTE]+master#query:[VOTE]%20master+page:1+mid:zuirstynwqyut3jx+state:results I guess it would be a good idea to add it to the documentation. I wonder how people test the master pom before voting. musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:59

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Musachy Barroso wrote: > Yeah Martin is right, see > > http://struts.markmail.org/search/?q=[VOTE]+master#query:[VOTE]%20master+page:1+mid:zuirstynwqyut3jx+state:results

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Sunday 26 April 2009 11:02:51 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > In fact we don't have to use that setting at all, as the DMI magic > happens at execution time, not configuration building time. To enable > this, we only need to enable @Action to be applied to classes, and use > "execute" as the method,

Re: struts-master pom release

Which brings me back to my first question. Knowing that lukasz will be added any day now, should we hold off a few days? Otherwise we will all have to spin some cycles again on this for the next release. -Wes On 4/26/09, Martin Cooper wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Musachy Barroso wr

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-3101 I am taking a look at it. musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Again you're right, I'm not sure how I got so far off-track. As > Musachy said it is a valid use-case so we'll try to get it in. > > On 4/26/09, Andreas Jos

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

Again you're right, I'm not sure how I got so far off-track. As Musachy said it is a valid use-case so we'll try to get it in. On 4/26/09, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:57:59 pm Wes Wannemacher wrote: >> On Sunday 26 April 2009 04:53:23 pm Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: >>

Re: struts-master pom release

I'd say just wait, it will happen in the next couple of days. musachy On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Which brings me back to my first question. Knowing that lukasz will be > added any day now, should we hold off a few days? Otherwise we will > all have to spin some cyc

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

ok changes are in, and the doc has been updated: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WW/convention+plugin#conventionplugin-apply...@actionand@Actionsattheclasslevel give it a try and let me know. @Actions and @Action can now be applied to classes. if an "execute" method is defined in the c

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sunday 26 April 2009 06:56:17 pm Musachy Barroso wrote: > I'd say just wait, it will happen in the next couple of days. > Yep, that's fine. Martin, do you want to release it when you do the official adding of our newest committer? Or should I just watch for it? -Wes -- Wes Wannemacher Aut

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Which brings me back to my first question. Knowing that lukasz will be > added any day now, should we hold off a few days? Otherwise we will > all have to spin some cycles again on this for the next release. Is your concern that you want

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sunday 26 April 2009 07:14:30 pm Martin Cooper wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > Which brings me back to my first question. Knowing that lukasz will be > > added any day now, should we hold off a few days? Otherwise we will > > all have to spin some cycles aga

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 07:14:30 pm Martin Cooper wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Wes Wannemacher > wrote: > > > Which brings me back to my first question. Knowing that lukasz will be > > > added any day now, should we hold of

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sunday 26 April 2009 07:47:25 pm Martin Cooper wrote: > > There's no requirement to serialise votes and releases the way you describe > above. In fact, as Wendy pointed out before, we could actually run the > votes concurrently. I'd say there's very little chance that the POM vote > would fail,

Re: struts-master pom release

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 07:47:25 pm Martin Cooper wrote: > > > > There's no requirement to serialise votes and releases the way you > describe > > above. In fact, as Wendy pointed out before, we could actually run the > > votes concurrentl

Re: getting to 2.1.7

I don't know if running a static code analysis tool over the codebase is part of the release process (getting ready for 2.1.7), so just for the hell of it I just ran struts2 trunk through findbugs. It found 37 "bugs". Most of them are not bugs (but rather not quite best practices), but many c

Re: getting to 2.1.7

On Sunday 26 April 2009 09:14:44 pm Dale Newfield wrote: > I don't know if running a static code analysis tool over the codebase is > part of the release process (getting ready for 2.1.7), so just for the > hell of it I just ran struts2 trunk through findbugs. It found 37 > "bugs". Most of them a

Re: getting to 2.1.7

Wes Wannemacher wrote: One issue findbugs points out is that the BackgroundProcess constructor starts it's thread before returning, which means that any subclass won't get to finish it's constructor before the thread is started. This is relevant to the solution offered at http://cwiki.apache.org

Struts git mirrors now available

Thanks to the git infra team, we have git mirrors for Struts: Here are mirrors created: * git://git.apache.org/struts1.git * git://git.apache.org/struts2.git * git://git.apache.org/struts-sandbox.git * git://git.apache.org/struts-maven.git See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1991

Re: getting to 2.1.7

Using Thread.wait()/Thread.notify() comes to mind. (*Chris*) On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Dale Newfield wrote: > Wes Wannemacher wrote: > >> One issue findbugs points out is that the BackgroundProcess constructor >>> starts it's thread before returning, which means that any subclass won't

Re: Struts git mirrors now available

On Monday 27 April 2009 01:11:48 am Don Brown wrote: > Thanks to the git infra team, we have git mirrors for Struts: > > Here are mirrors created: > * git://git.apache.org/struts1.git > * git://git.apache.org/struts2.git > * git://git.apache.org/struts-sandbox.git > * git://git.apache.org/strut

Re: Struts git mirrors now available

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > Don, > > I'm not familiar much with Git. I know of it, and have read a little about it. > Is there a significant advantage to using Git over Subversion? While Atlassian still uses Subversion, I've moved over to using Git for all my work an

Re: Struts git mirrors now available

On Monday 27 April 2009 01:29:45 am Don Brown wrote: > > While Atlassian still uses Subversion, I've moved over to using Git > for all my work and personal projects, and I've found it a much better > tool to keep me productive (great branching/merge, sane cli, > super-fast, etc). However, why I'm

Re: Struts git mirrors now available

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote: > After reading up on Git a bit and noticing right away that there are no more > hidden '.svn' directories, I'm sold. :) > > (I'm an easy sell) Yeah, for me, it was a lot of little things too: * no .svn directories means easy searching and q

Re: getting to 2.1.7

Chris Pratt wrote: Using Thread.wait()/Thread.notify() comes to mind. wait() and notify() are methods of Object, and are what I'm looking for. Thread happens to be a class object and therefore you can call Thread.wait()/Thread.notify() but it probably won't be the synchronization you're loo

Re: WW-2394 really implemented?

On Monday 27 April 2009 01:11:13 am Musachy Barroso wrote: > ok changes are in, and the doc has been updated: > > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WW/convention+plugin#conventionplugin-apply...@actionand@Actionsattheclasslevel > > give it a try and let me know. @Actions and @Action can