The Apache Jenkins build system has built Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix (build
#1419)
Status: Still Failing
Check console output at
https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/1419/ to view
the results.
Changes:
[thomasm] OAK-5621 Warn traversal queries: false positives
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix (build
#1418)
Status: Failure
Check console output at
https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/1418/ to view
the results.
Changes:
[thomasm] OAK-5621 Warn traversal queries: false positives for
Hi,
On 10/02/17 10:09, "Francesco Mari" wrote:
> As much as I like the proposal of slimming down oak-run, I think that
> dividing oak-run in oak-operations and oak-development is the wrong
> way to go. This kind of division is horizontal, since commands
> pertaining to
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Stefan Egli wrote:
> +1, looks like a bug to me.
>
Ok. Logged OAK-5626. I've some doubt if it's a good idea to simply
always reset. Would discuss it on the issue
Thanks,
Vikas
+1, looks like a bug to me.
Cheers,
Stefan
On 09/02/17 23:17, "Vikas Saurabh" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>_Disclaimer_ : I get confused with change processor code, so not sure
>if this is an issue or PEBKAC
>
>ChangeProcessor#queueSizeChanged sets blocking flag to true if queue
As much as I like the proposal of slimming down oak-run, I think that
dividing oak-run in oak-operations and oak-development is the wrong
way to go. This kind of division is horizontal, since commands
pertaining to different persistence backends are grouped together
according to their roles. This
hi davide
could you elaborate a bit on your proposal? from the names (oak-operations
and oak-development) it's not clear to me what code would go into which
module... also i am not sure about deleting oak-run. for the sake of
limiting impact (also when it comes to the backport you mention later