Re: Failed CXF 3.1.X build

Thanks a lot. It certainly is an issue, I hope we could see what takes so much time (without output) and fix it. Sunday, April 8, 2018, 11:21:23 AM, you wrote: JDA> I changed the inactivity check to 30 mins. But is the build really silent for 3 minutes and that's not an issue? JDA> John

Re: Failed CXF 3.1.X build

Thanks John, now the build fails with "Build timed out (after 3 minutes). Marking the build as aborted.", is it possible to increase the inactivity timeout a bit? Thanks. Saturday, April 7, 2018, 8:09:24 PM, you wrote: JDA> I just changed the job config similar to what I did for master, it'll

Re: Failed CXF 3.1.X build

I changed the inactivity check to 30 mins. But is the build really silent for 3 minutes and that's not an issue? John On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 11:01 AM Andriy Redko wrote: > Thanks John, now the build fails with "Build timed out (after 3 minutes). > Marking the build as

Re: Failed CXF 3.1.X build

The last build is green, https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/CXF/job/CXF-3.1.x/1410. Sadly, there are no timestamps in the console, but it seems like "Modules changed, recalculating dependency graph" phase takes some time. The previous build

Re: Release cxf-xjc-plugin so that it works with Java 10?

+1 Yeah, add automatic-module-name in MANIFEST is a good start that CXF can eventually move to module-path way. Since CXF is actually already OSGi module based, we won’t run into such “split-package” issue in CXF, follow the common rule(root package name) to add automatic-module-name in each

Typo

Hi cxf-ers I spy a typo on your from page. The warning says do not use 3.2.2 or 3.2.3 , but use 3.2.3 ! You mean 3.2.4 of course. HTH Gav…

Re: Typo

Hi Gav, you're right, thanks for the info. I've just corrected it. Cheers Dennis Am 09.04.2018 um 06:22 schrieb Gavin McDonald: > Hi cxf-ers > > I spy a typo on your from page. > > The warning says do not use 3.2.2 or 3.2.3 , but use 3.2.3 ! > > You mean 3.2.4 of course. > > HTH > > Gav… >