Why not do a full checkout each day always?
--jason
On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 02:56 PM, Chris Kimpton wrote:
Hi,
--- David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think so, the error is not shown.
I built fresh from a clean checkout last night with no problems.
The
problem may be that
Bugs item #697165, was opened at 2003-03-04 10:12
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697165group_id=22866
Category: JBossMX
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Jurjan-Paul Medema (jurjanpaul)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #697165, was opened at 2003-03-04 10:12
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697165group_id=22866
Category: JBossMX
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Jurjan-Paul Medema (jurjanpaul)
Assigned to:
I just added CVSROOT/cvsignore to the repository for global ignores.
If something needs to be ignored globally added it here, else use a
local .cvsroot.
--jason
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The
I changed the XDoclet config in libraries.ent to default to
thirdparty/xdoclet-xdoclet/lib, which allows other projects to continue
to function. If you want to use the bits from jboss/xdoclet define
xdoclet.xdoclet.lib in your build/local.properties.
I still have not figured out how this ever
Bugs item #697254, was opened at 2003-03-04 14:56
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697254group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Marcus Eriksson (marcuseriksson)
Assigned to:
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.3.1_06
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
Hey all,
I can see why David was so excited about the new JBoss Remoting framework
that Jeff Haynie and Tom Elrod wrote. I had dinner with Jeff in Boston last
night and over a few beers he discussed in detail their design and features
the framework provides. Jeff/Tom, please correct me where
Yes, the class downloading is inefficient and has some large room for
improvement. However, to be noted, that it will only download classes
from the remote side if the class doesn't exists locally (or at least
isn't visible). This is a little more efficient, as I remember, than
RMI where the
I'm not sure if it so much of an issue since only DP classes will be
downloaded.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeff
Haynie
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] jboss remoting
Yes,
Hi,
JBoss 3.2 does not seem to support application clients as specified in J2EE Spec,
v1.3, section 9. Is there any reason why this is not supported other than nobody has
asked it?
Igor Fedorenko
Think smart. Think automated. Think Dynamics.
www.thinkdynamics.com
What are the advantages of it? It would require a client container. I
wonder if any other vendor supports it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Igor
Fedorenko
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:24 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sourceforge. Net
Or maybe noone has implemented it. Every now and again someone asks.
Unless it can be done really easily I'm not in favor of trying to add this
to jb3.2. I think it can be done really easily in jb4 since we are (or
will be) starting a jmx mbean server in the client so we can easily make
the app
WebLogic 6+ has supported it (though not well documented at all!).
Advantage is for GUI applications having access to the same JNDI
environment that its web application cousin has - there is a
potential to reuse alot of code between the two environments.
Shared security mechanisms and client-side
Ok, great. I will do it toworrow I hope. Should only write a testcase
first.
//Peter
On Mon, 2003-03-03 at 20:00, Scott M Stark wrote:
You can apply this to 3.0. I will handle the changes to allow for subclassing
LoaderRespoitory.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology
Although I did not try it, both WebSphere 5.0 and WebLogic 7.0 both claim to support
it.
The main advantage that I see is java:comp/env JNDI namespace on the client side.
This way it becomes possible to share a lot of code between EJB and non-EJB parts of
the app.
-Original Message-
i'd just like to toss in my 2 cents and say that it'd be really nice if my
web start clients could use the java:comp/env namespace. then i could use
the xdoclet util classes that were generated with the logical ejb reference
and not the phyisical one.
-Original Message-
From: Igor
-Original Message-
From: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Support for application clients
Or maybe noone has implemented it. Every now and again
someone asks.
Unless it can be done
Bugs item #697465, was opened at 2003-03-04 11:45
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697465group_id=22866
Category: JBossSOAP
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Joe Hung (joehung)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous
Bugs item #679705, was opened at 2003-02-03 18:40
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=679705group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Stefan Kuehnel (skuehnel)
Assigned
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1065
Successful tests: 1061
Errors:1
Failures: 3
[time of test: 2003-03-04.12-04 GMT]
[java.version:
I'm begging people not to do any large scale changes to EJB land. I'm about
to undertake converting all the EJB interceptors and invokers to use the AOP
Invocation object and Interceptor interface. This my first step on
integrating the AOP DP framework.
I'm asking you to please notify me before
The jboss_3_2.dtd was way out of date with respect to the container
invoker configuration so I updated it and checked it in. Take a look
at this and see if there are other missing elements or elements that
should be dropped.
One construct that I don't understand in the invoker-bindings/invoker
The 3.2 testsuite is not building under JDK 1.3 due to the inclusion of the
java.sql.Savepoint
class:
[javac] C:\cvs\JBoss3.2\jboss-3.2\testsuite\src\main\org\jboss\test\jca\jdbc
\TestConnection.java:18: cannot resolve symbol
[javac] symbol : class Savepoint
[javac] location:
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.3.1_06
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
This code has been compiling in your test runs under jdk 1.3.1 for both 3.0
and 3.2 for 2 weeks.
Can you check the contents of jboss-jca.sar to see if Savepoint is in it?
I believe prior to Jasons build speed up change a couple of days ago this
contained Savepoint and the other jdk 1.4 java
No, its not there:
testsuite 125jar -tf ../connector/output/lib/jboss-jca.sar | grep Save
testsuite 126
All Jason's changes were on main, not 3.2. Looking further into the issue
I see the tree was built with JDK 1.4.1 and the testsuite was trying to build
with JDK 1.3.1 and this does not work
Bugs item #697713, was opened at 2003-03-04 19:02
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697713group_id=22866
Category: Clustering
Group: v3.2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Scott M
Bugs item #697713, was opened at 2003-03-04 19:02
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697713group_id=22866
Category: Clustering
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Scott M
Bugs item #697165, was opened at 2003-03-04 02:12
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697165group_id=22866
Category: JBossMX
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Jurjan-Paul Medema (jurjanpaul)
Assigned to: Scott
On 2003.03.04 21:30 Scott M Stark wrote:
No, its not there:
testsuite 125jar -tf ../connector/output/lib/jboss-jca.sar | grep Save
testsuite 126
All Jason's changes were on main, not 3.2. Looking further into the issue
I see the tree was built with JDK 1.4.1 and the testsuite was trying to
Yes, the testsuite was being build with 1.3.1 after the rest of
the codebase had been build with 1.4.1.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.4.1_01
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1137
Successful tests: 1128
Errors:9
Failures: 0
[time of test: 2003-03-05.02-42 GMT]
[java.version:
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Scott M Stark wrote:
The jboss_3_2.dtd was way out of date with respect to the container
invoker configuration so I updated it and checked it in. Take a look
at this and see if there are other missing elements or elements that
should be dropped.
One construct that I
I still don't understand why the incoming protocol should dictate the protocol
that any invocations made the the target bean. If I'm bean X and some .NET
clown invoked via soap, why do I want to in turn invoke the beans Y and Z
through soap when I can use a local interface or optimized RMI?
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1130
Successful tests: 1122
Errors:8
Failures: 0
[time of test: 2003-03-05.05-16 GMT]
[java.version:
Bugs item #697165, was opened at 2003-03-04 02:12
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697165group_id=22866
Category: JBossMX
Group: v3.2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Jurjan-Paul Medema (jurjanpaul)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #689562, was opened at 2003-02-19 12:22
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=689562group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: James Higginbotham (jwhigginbotham)
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.3.1_06
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
Quoting Igor Fedorenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-Original Message-
From: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Support for application clients
Or maybe noone has implemented
Bugs item #697254, was opened at 2003-03-04 05:56
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=697254group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Invalid
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Marcus Eriksson (marcuseriksson)
Assigned
bandwidth - the more I use, the more it costs me... ;-)
Also, I'd like to think that most developers do an update rather than
a full checkout and so it helps highlight any issues from that too.
...but I guess the full checkout did not help as it is still
failing...
Chris
--- Jason Dillon
43 matches
Mail list logo
