-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David
Jencks
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 12:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [JBoss-dev] XSLSubDeployer improvements and jca 1.5 mdb
deployment
I've modified the deployment system to allow for
On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 10:57 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
David
Jencks
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 12:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [JBoss-dev] XSLSubDeployer improvements and jca 1.5 mdb
deployment
On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 12:58 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
Not sure I like this idea. Tell me why we need to support 3.2 and 3.0
descriptors in 4.0? I'd much rather a 3.2 component crap out
gracefully in
4.0 than have to maintain 3 separate configuration mechanisms.
I wish we could get rid of
On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 12:36 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
Why? Because everybody is very familiar with them. Why? because its
simple
and easy to maintain and modify. Yes, the XML parsing needs to be
moved to
a separate module, but the classes themselves have held up fine. I
will not
allow
Bugs item #755690, was opened at 2003-06-17 04:16
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gregwilkins
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=755690group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Bugs item #755690, was opened at 2003-06-17 09:46
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by amanpreet_1980
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=755690group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dain
Sundstrom
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] XSLSubDeployer improvements and jca 1.5 mdb
deployment
On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 12:36 AM,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dain
Sundstrom
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] XSLSubDeployer improvements and jca 1.5 mdb
deployment
On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 12:58 AM, Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David
Jencks
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] XSLSubDeployer improvements and jca 1.5 mdb
deployment
On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 10:57 PM, Bill
Its a simply ease of use argument. Why should I have to go through a conversion step
if this can be handled by the deployment process.
The current XML/metadata parsing is not maintainable. Changes are made that are
not reflected in the schemas which make it difficult for tools to follow JBoss.
An mbean is still an object metamodel. Exposing this as an mbean is a seperate issue.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
I'm not convinced we are, I am unconvinced anything more than mbeans is
necessary. Configuring
A deployer that tells you what is wrong with the xml is a schema validator. There
is no reason to embed this functionality in the deployers, use an xml schema and
let the xml to object transform handle the validation.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
configure:
init:
compile-mbean-sources:
[mkdir] Created dir:
Bugs item #755915, was opened at 2003-06-17 13:43
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rodburgett
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=755915group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority:
Bugs item #755915, was opened at 2003-06-17 13:43
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rodburgett
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=755915group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority:
Bugs item #755915, was opened at 2003-06-17 13:43
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=755915group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution:
Hello developers,
I tried to build the main testcases using
jboss-head/testsuite/build I hit 100 compilation
errors
Some of them are:
[javac]
/home/saldhana/JBOSSDev/jboss-head/testsuite/src/main/org/jboss/test/cmp/jbossdo/collection/CollectionUnitTestCase.java:14:
package javax.jdo does not
Have you executed build from jboss-head/build before that?
I guess persistence module is not built for some reason.
alex
Tuesday, June 17, 2003, 4:50:50 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote:
AS Hello developers,
ASI tried to build the main testcases using
AS jboss-head/testsuite/build I hit 100
Have you checked that all relevant thirdparty modules have been obtained
through cvs?
BTW: I got no jdo.jar on my workspace either ... Must be some recent
addition, I guess. sun-jdo?
CGJ
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Anil Saldhana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17.
Bugs item #755915, was opened at 2003-06-17 13:43
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by d_jencks
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=755915group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Bugs item #746298, was opened at 2003-05-30 19:51
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by d_jencks
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=746298group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
No, the sources are in persistence.
alex
Tuesday, June 17, 2003, 5:27:41 PM, Dr. Jung wrote:
JDC Have you checked that all relevant thirdparty modules have been obtained
JDC through cvs?
JDC BTW: I got no jdo.jar on my workspace either ... Must be some recent
JDC addition, I guess. sun-jdo?
Jung , Dr. Christoph wrote:
Have you checked that all relevant thirdparty modules have been obtained
through cvs?
BTW: I got no jdo.jar on my workspace either ... Must be some recent
addition, I guess. sun-jdo?
The javax.jdo classes should be in the source tree, so I don't think
there's any
We should be looking at jaxb driven by schemas for the metadata parsing before
considering the commons digester framework. I'm looking at jaxb for inclusion
in the 3.2 branch to address some stability issues.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
17:29 Jun 17
java version 1.4.1_02
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment,
Adrian Brock wrote:
Hi Luke,
In head, the plan is to use jsr160 and
the MBeanServerConnection interface
from jmx1.2
OK, thanks Adrian. I'll have a look at that.
--
Luke Taylor. Monkey Machine Ltd.
PGP Key ID: 0x57E9523Chttp://www.monkeymachine.ltd.uk
Hi Luke,
In head, the plan is to use jsr160 and
the MBeanServerConnection interface
from jmx1.2
Regards,
Adrian
Adrian Brock
Director of Support
Back Office
JBoss Group, LLC
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: Luke Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: JBoss Dev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:48 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] ManagementBean and
Bugs item #756114, was opened at 2003-06-17 11:43
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=756114group_id=22866
Category: Clustering
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Luke Taylor wrote:
Adrian Brock wrote:
Hi Luke,
In head, the plan is to use jsr160 and
the MBeanServerConnection interface
from jmx1.2
OK, thanks Adrian. I'll have a look at that.
I've used an MBeanServer instance for the time being 'cos that compiles
OK and I'm not sure exactly what the
Luke Taylor wrote:
Adrian Brock wrote:
Hi Luke,
In head, the plan is to use jsr160 and
the MBeanServerConnection interface
from jmx1.2
OK, thanks Adrian. I'll have a look at that.
I've used an MBeanServer instance for the time being 'cos that compiles
OK and I'm not sure exactly what the
Title: Untitled
TR.Rehber 11 - 199$
Hi David,
Did you forget to commit stylesheets/JMSMDBTemplate.xsl?
Regards,
Adrian
Adrian Brock
Director of Support
Back Office
JBoss Group, LLC
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Yes indeed, many thanks. I need to retest since I made some additions
since the original commit.
Sorry for the delay on this, I've been having trouble connecting to cvs
today.
david jencks
On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 03:05 PM, Adrian Brock wrote:
Hi David,
Did you forget to commit
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
NOTE: Sourceforge pserver cvs access is now using the backup server -
Bugs item #756389, was opened at 2003-06-17 20:18
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=756389group_id=22866
Category: JBossMQ
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
NOTE: Sourceforge pserver cvs access is now using the backup server -
I just completed a fairly large checkin to fix some remoting bugs (mostly
related to callbacks) and to add some new features, like being able to call
directly on local server instead of having to go through a transport layer
(which again is really mostly related to callbacks).
Everything is
This is really great stuff Tom. You guys do great work.
Some other things that need to get done in the future:
1. Have SOAP transport work as a servlet within web-container
2. Develop a broadcast abstraction so that we can integrate multicast
libraries like JavaGroups. It would be cool if you
JSR160 is partially implemented in HEAD and talks to Jboss Remoting API.
It shouldn't be too much longer to have a full implementation working.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luke
Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:44 PM
To: [EMAIL
40 matches
Mail list logo
