Bugs item #618410, was opened at 2002-10-04 10:48
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618410group_id=22866
Category: JBossWeb
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Vladimir Korenev (vkorenev)
Assigned to:
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.3.1_03
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
Bugs item #562972, was opened at 2002-05-31 17:30
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=562972group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 8
Submitted By: Marius Kotsbak (mkotsbak)
Assigned
Dear jboss-development ,
Want
ToHarvest A Lot Of Targeted Email
Addresses In A Very Short Time?
Target Email Extractor is a
powerful Email Program that harvests Targeted Email
Addresses from search engines, any specified
eManager Notification *
The following mail was blocked since it contains sensitive content.
Source mailbox: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Destination mailbox(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rule/Policy: Anti-Spam
Action: Quarantine to D:\Program
Thanks. I am convinced that this is the way to go... now I just need to
find how the way fits into buildmagic ;)
--jason
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, James Higginbotham wrote:
Jason,
I had submitted an example directly to David sometime last week, but
I'll share with the world now so that the
Are there any plans to decouple JBoss from the logging
system used?
According to the docs it seems JBoss is currently tightly
coupled to log4j. I have absolutely nothing against log4j, for all I know it is
(one of) the best logging systems available to the Java platform. However, I do
Other then that I think we should use the parallel task in the testsuite
to speed up the xdoclet and jar tasks. I'm not sure if it would really
speed it up but doing a one-test takes forever because of the xdoclet
I made the output (jar) tasks run in parallel. I can not make the xdoclet
I just looked over the commons logging api and it closly resembles
org.jboss.logging.Logger. The only major differences are that Logger is a
class and is serializable (the log4j commons log impl does not) not a big
deal, as we can write a subclass of the log4j log factory to produce
Well, we happen to be one of the companies who would like JBoss to have
support for the logging system of what you call the JDK 1.4 crap API.
If what you are saying is that JBoss is already decoupled from its
logging system I am quite happy - from the docs it just seemed to me it
was not.
But
Bugs item #618482, was opened at 2002-10-04 12:12
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618482group_id=22866
Category: JBossMQ
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Bohus Pollak (bohus)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #618482, was opened at 2002-10-04 12:12
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618482group_id=22866
Category: JBossMQ
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Bohus Pollak (bohus)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #618491, was opened at 2002-10-04 05:42
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618491group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Vinh Nguyen (softwaremasters)
Assigned to:
Well, we happen to be one of the companies who would like JBoss to have
support for the logging system of what you call the JDK 1.4 crap API.
Ick *spit* Some like pain, some prefer pleasure ;)
But why is there no support for using the standard java.util.logging
mechanism with JBoss?
No
Bugs item #618491, was opened at 2002-10-04 05:42
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618491group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Vinh Nguyen (softwaremasters)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #618491, was opened at 2002-10-04 13:42
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618491group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Vinh Nguyen (softwaremasters)
Assigned to: Alexey
Bugs item #618410, was opened at 2002-10-04 08:48
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618410group_id=22866
Category: JBossWeb
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Vladimir Korenev (vkorenev)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #618410, was opened at 2002-10-04 08:48
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618410group_id=22866
Category: JBossWeb
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Vladimir Korenev (vkorenev)
Assigned to:
Patches item #618523, was opened at 2002-10-04 06:30
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376687aid=618523group_id=22866
Category: JBossTX
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Matt Cleveland (groovesoftware)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #618491, was opened at 2002-10-04 13:42
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=618491group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: Works For Me
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Vinh Nguyen (softwaremasters)
Assigned
Jason,
The problem with writing build components in Java is that the maintenece
process is slow and difficult, and only a select few can currently perform
this.
Not sure by what you mean re: maitennance. If you're talking about reading
the code, I think that it's going to be easier for Joe
David Jencks wrote:
On 2002.10.03 22:12:42 -0400 Igor Fedorenko wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
On 2002.09.27 16:21:33 -0400 Igor Fedorenko wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
Hi Igor,
I'd like to stick with the jboss tm and add the needed functionality.
Can you outline what you have been thinking
David,
I forget -- were you the one that started that thread re: ANT JMX on the
ant-dev mailing list? It makes so much sense it's scary :) I think
refactoring ANT and JMX/JBoss is a great idea, from a technical (apolitical)
standpoint.
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Do you know how you switch the LogFactory impl? I am
guessing there is a
system property, but I did not see anything obvious by looking at the
javadocs.
I've been using commons logging for a few months now - not bad at all..
You drive the impl from a properties file called
Title: Message
randahl,
I am
swimming back up this thread as it seems it has kicked up a fuss.
.
dude,
the bottom line is very simple. If you really care, you put your time on
the line, or you pay us to do it (we do a lot of work under contract for
customers on this list). I do believe
Hello,
And what about deployment order? When I was thinking about it (and we
exchanged a few e-mails with David), the deployment order issue has poped
up. When you have explicit information about dependencies, that's fine but
you don't have this all the time i.e. if you create a new topic
module name=Foo
depends
module name=Bar/
/depends
libs
lib ref=my.class.path.ref
/libs
ear/
war/
java/
xdoclet/
/module
YES! at least I can read that, (I really can't read 90% of the
buildmagic files, jason do you have the cojones to get rid of your own
work
Sacha,
I think the counter idea will work fine, given a presupposition that all
MBs that a given MB (whose info is to be persisted) depends on also have
their MB info persisted.
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sacha
Labourey
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Sacha Labourey wrote:
Hello,
And what about deployment order?
wouldn't the order be explicit if the registry stores a script-like file
of its changes and then reads it at startup?
similar to how a db constructs itself from a tx log
-- Juha
OK, I had understood the problem was that one of the loadClass call hadn't
gone *at all* through a UCL and directly went to the System classloader. my
mistake.
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
Scott M Stark
Envoyé : jeudi, 3 octobre
I am thinking about how to do this.
--jason
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Scott M Stark wrote:
Less mysteriousness, as in:
!--
| Initialize the build system. Must depend on
'_buildmagic:init'.
| Other targets should depend on 'init' or things will
mysteriously fail.
Jason,
please pay close attention here.
I want you to justify in less than 10 seconds, what BM brings above and
beyond straight ANT. Give me examples in JBoss. I am sorry to put you
through this again. You know how I feel about complex stuff vs simple
stuff.
Also we have a contracting
I suggested to use an internal counter in JBoss that
increments each time a new service is deployed. As part of
brilliant.
It still doesn't take care of dependencies (shut a cluster of services
down) but it clearly one of those transparent ease of use things that I
like to push.
marc f
brilliant.
are you ironic? :)
It still doesn't take care of dependencies (shut a cluster of services
down)
Why wouldn't it work? Can you give me a simple scenario that fails? Maybe
that's evident but I don't see it right now...
Ai-je la tete dans le popotin?
Bugs item #609132, was opened at 2002-09-13 17:58
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=609132group_id=22866
Category: Build System
Group: v3.2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Ulrich Romahn (diggermaus)
Assigned to:
Why wouldn't it work? Can you give me a simple scenario that
fails? Maybe that's evident but I don't see it right now...
A depends on B. We shut down B. There is no way just by the order of
deployment to know that A depends on B. The numbering schemes has the
same limitation (the user
OK, but this limitation is the same for *any* implicit dependency scheme.
Either you explicitly state and this problem can be solved or you don't and
in the scenario you give A should already fail when we undeploy B (not only
when the server restart, but directly after we remove B).
At this
Title: Message
marc f
There is no reason telling me the basics
of the business, Morpheus - I might very well swallow that famous addictive red
pill you keep on pushing. It would suit my company quite well if I got deeper
into what is becoming a more and more central technology to us,
Hiya Dain.
I've made some more changes to the CMP code in 3.0.2 (+ index patch). The
changes enforce the field name length supported by the database and allow
an identifier to be wrapped with a token, we use .
The first change is obvious. The second is to prevent one of our databases
we agree,
it will serve a purpose, It wont' solve the world hunger problem
marc f
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Sacha Labourey
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] creating
Title: Message
| There is no
reason telling me the basics of the business, Morpheus -
|I might very
well swallow that famous addictive red pill you keep on pushing. It would
suit
I am indeed morpheus, and I am still looking for the
one. You kids keep on taking those pills, something tells
Bugs item #609132, was opened at 2002-09-13 15:58
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=609132group_id=22866
Category: Build System
Group: v3.2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Ulrich Romahn (diggermaus)
Assigned to:
Post it. Dain is away.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Conner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'jboss development' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:47 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev]
Ok this is frankly useless,
so I have a problem with a EAR somewhere and the console is just full of
like 4 stack traces with all the lastDeployed lastModified watch state
and that stuff THAT IS USELESS, but the actual message of why I don't
deploy is lost in the noise.
This is the 3rd time I
On 2002.10.04 09:39:07 -0400 Matt Munz wrote:
David,
I forget -- were you the one that started that thread re: ANT JMX on
the
ant-dev mailing list?
I don't remember, but I've suggested ant should be a set of mbeans at least
twice on the ant-dev list.
david
It makes so much sense it's
I did a fresh check of main this morning and find that I cannot build with 1.4.1 FCS
release on WinXP any longer:
build 63build.bat clean
Calling ..\tools\bin\ant.bat clean
Buildfile: build.xml
_buildmagic:init:global:
Trying to override old definition of task property
_buildmagic:init:
Can latest version of Ant. I think I had same problem. Well, I had trouble
running ant with 1.4.1 on XP.
Use Ant 1.5.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott
M Stark
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:25 PM
To: [EMAIL
Juha JMX-dev,
Why is the MB Registry a MMB? Could it be a Dynamic MB instead? I'm
running into a chicken-and-egg problem. The persistence interceptor
instantiated in preRegister() for the MB REgistry MMB tries to create a
Timer MB. This requires that the MB registry MMB has already been
I am using 1.5:
build 65ant -version
Apache Ant version 1.5 compiled on July 9 2002
build 66echo $ANT_HOME
C:/usr/local/Java/jakarta-ant-1.5
and since I'm using the build.bat this should be picking up the ant included
in the tools which is also 1.5, correct?
Scott Stark
Hi all,
Just thought of another (better?) option. Leave the registry as a MMB
with the default NullPersistenceManager. Then persist using an internal
mechanism (this is what the Dynamic MB would do anyway).
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Sacha Labourey wrote:
It is just about freedom: we sbsolutly need to let the door open for fools
to do foolish things ;)
I want infinite ways to do it right, and infinite ways to hang myself. :)
---
This sf.net email
Number of tests run: 934
Successful tests: 930
Errors:4
Failures: 0
[time of test: 4 October 2002 12:49 GMT]
[java.version: 1.3.1]
[java.vendor: Apple Computer, Inc.]
Why is it that evry time I make the build system easier/faster/beter that
you start bitching at me with non-sensical dribble?
Absolutely, Scott is right RE: un-necessary complicated stuff that makes
NO sense to a reader and serves an obscure goal.
I am convined that anything that I do you
I am looking into this.
--jason
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Scott M Stark wrote:
I am using 1.5:
build 65ant -version
Apache Ant version 1.5 compiled on July 9 2002
build 66echo $ANT_HOME
C:/usr/local/Java/jakarta-ant-1.5
and since I'm using the build.bat this should be picking up the ant
Can you explain the Ant MBean thing to me please.
--jason
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, David Jencks wrote:
On 2002.10.04 09:39:07 -0400 Matt Munz wrote:
David,
I forget -- were you the one that started that thread re: ANT JMX on
the
ant-dev mailing list?
I don't remember, but I've
Probably not:-)
My idea involved a complete rewrite of ant as a bunch of mbeans, using as
much jmx functionality as possible. This was based on the observation that
the ant team seems to struggle a lot with classloading and questions of
exactly how detyped their interfaces should be, plus
Can you explain the Ant MBean thing to me please.
Here's the way I see it.
ANT features:
core system composed of engine + modules
engine loads modules at runtime
mechanism for wrapping a POJO in a standard / generic API
Mix and match of modules (via generic API) to create desired
David,
As far as I know ant is still
remarkably unfriendly to attempts to run it inside anything else, most of
the methods needed are private or package access.
Yeah, there's a lot of paranoid classes in there. If we show them that
something useful can be done by opening up more of the ant
It seems to work with:
java.vm.version: 1.4.0-b92
I am downloading 1.4.1 FCS now.
--jason
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Scott M Stark wrote:
I did a fresh check of main this morning and find that I cannot build with 1.4.1 FCS
release on WinXP any longer:
build 63build.bat clean
Calling
On 2002.10.03 12:02:40 -0400 Scott M Stark wrote:
Ok, but should the lifecycle of the interceptors be the same as the
lifecycle of the bean? Right now a service is an mbean that is
available through the jmx-console indepedenent of its JBoss service
lifecycle notion. How is that going to
This should be resolved now... though it looks like there is another problem
with the build (not bldsys related).
--jason
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Scott M Stark wrote:
I did a fresh check of main this morning and find that I cannot build with 1.4.1 FCS
release on WinXP any longer:
build
This should be resolved now.
--jason
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Langelage, Frank wrote:
Hi Jason,
even with a completely new checkout the build of jboss-all fails for me
with Java 1.4.1-b21on Linux.
Using java 1.3.1 on ReliantUnix works fine.
Tagets build and clobber fail with the same
Ì©·áÏòÄãÎʺÃ!
ÎÒ¹«Ë¾³¤ÆÚ´Óʹú¼ÊóÒ×,ΪÍÚ¾òÊг¡Ç±Á¦¡¢À©´ó¾Óª¹æÄ£,ÒâÔÚ¹óµØ
Ñ°ÕÒÁôÒ×´°¿Ú,Ìؽ«´Ë¼Ûͬ±í³Ê¹óµ¥Î»²Î¿¼.ÎÒ˾ÌṩһÁ÷Æ·ÖÊ,Ò»Á÷·þÎñ,
ËÍ»õÉÏÃÅ, ÅúÁí¾ù¿É.
Ì©·áóÒ×¼¯ÍŹ«Ë¾
̨±±ÊÐÄþ²¨Â·38#óÒ×ÖÐÐÄA´±16-20
Öйú´ú±í´¦£ºÍõ±£¹ú
ÁªÏµµç»°£º01395-9727338
Ò».µçÄÔÅä¼þ(RMB.Ôª):
A:Ó²ÅÌ
Maxtor
63 matches
Mail list logo
