While I'm in favor of breaking out the bindings (actually, I'd like to see
wider changes to the overall structure of proton, specifically proton-c. But I
won't thread-jack - I'll start a separate thread).
However - I think the python binding is the one binding where it may not be
practical,
I can see certain benefits to such a separation, mainly for folks
interested only in the bindings, but if I'm honest I'm not sure those
outweigh the additional complication it seems it may bring in some of
the other areas.
The python bindings are slightly more interesting than the others due
to
On 19/08/15 12:34 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I can see certain benefits to such a separation, mainly for folks
interested only in the bindings, but if I'm honest I'm not sure those
outweigh the additional complication it seems it may bring in some of
the other areas.
I think they actually do
Yes, its tagged as 0.10.
You may need to fetch the tags explicitly to see it: git fetch --tags
Robbie
On 19 August 2015 at 17:04, Irina Boverman ibove...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Robbie,
Is there a tag/branch for proton java 0.10 released?
Regards, Irina.
- Original Message -
From:
The proton-j tests appear to be failing on master for me, even for a
completely clean build with all the stuff that proton-j generates in the
source tree removed as well:
Leaked an instance of 'sun.nio.ch.ServerSocketChannelImpl[/127.0.0.1:36861]'
from:
java.lang.Exception
at
Hi Robbie,
Is there a tag/branch for proton java 0.10 released?
Regards, Irina.
- Original Message -
From: Robbie Gemmell rob...@apache.org
To: us...@qpid.apache.org, proton@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2015 2:14:07 PM
Subject: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Qpid Proton 0.10 released
The
Seems to be working here, and passed in CI on all the runs from
commits yesterday:
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Qpid/job/Qpid-proton-j/
NoSuchMethodError is an interesting one. I think code in that area
will have changed with Bozo's recent commit, but the only likely way
that should
On 19 August 2015 at 13:05, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/08/15 12:34 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I can see certain benefits to such a separation, mainly for folks
interested only in the bindings, but if I'm honest I'm not sure those
outweigh the additional complication it
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-950?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14703570#comment-14703570
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on PROTON-950:
Commit
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 10:45 -0400, Ken Giusti wrote:
Nicely done Alan!
One point - I'm a little confused about your advice regarding
pn_object_decref:
The proton C API has standard reference counting rules (but see [1]
below)
* A pointer returned by a pn_ function is either
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14703797#comment-14703797
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on PROTON-865:
Commit
11 matches
Mail list logo
