I dont think KEYS should be proton specific, its just the Qpid committers
and should be the same file as a result. Commons-* seem to use the same
KEYS file for example.
(Aside: we should probably be transitioning away from the KEYS file anyway
and using the new system they put in place for
It doesnt really affect the release since the files are now licenced, but
the diff below suggests the header wasn't added to the Java files where we
normally put it (at the top of the file), it would be nice if they were
consistent with the others.
Robbie
On 26 October 2012 14:42,
I would echo some of Robs points (since he beat me to saying them msyelf :)
) and add some of my own.
I also dont see a need to check out proton-c or proton-j in isolation, if
the tests for both of them sit a level up then thats what people should be
grabbing in my mind.
Duplicating code sounds
On 21 January 2013 13:14, Gordon Sim gordon.r@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/21/2013 11:43 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I don't think that list being separate is the main source of most of the
confusion with proton.
I agree and was not suggesting that it was.
Sorry, I didnt really mean to imply
So..NO-JIRA came about for two reasons.
First, as a way to escape the commit-hook level checking we voted that we
wanted in order to semi-enforce that people had a JIRA in their commit log,
because we were down in the ridiculous ~30% inclusion range not so many
years ago. Infra ultimately said
There is a staging repo on repository.apache.org that appears to have the
0.4 release artifacts in it and simply wasn't released at the time.
The files contain the changes from the last change that seems to have gone
into 0.4 (http://svn.apache.org/r1448733), building a copy of the 0.4
source
Hi all,
As some of you will already know, a mail was sent to committers@a.o earlier
outlining some of the newer services ASF infra offer that we may not know
about. One in particular stuck out for me, a service to populate JIRAs with
information about relavant commits to Subversion or Git. I have
On 24 May 2013 11:30, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
+1
That should have happened during the actual release. I'm not sure why it
didn't.
--Rafael
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
There is a staging repo on repository.apache.org
the functionality configured.
Robbie
On 24 May 2013 12:03, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
As some of you will already know, a mail was sent to committers@a.oearlier
outlining some of the newer services ASF infra offer that we may
not know about. One in particular stuck out
I raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6319 earlier and it
was actioned in under 5 minutes, so if you haven't already noticed:
subversion commit details are now being commented onto JIRAs (if you
include the reference!).
Robbie
On 28 May 2013 11:55, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm
On 15 August 2013 09:46, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote:
On 14.08.2013 22:04, Rafael Schloming wrote:
Hi,
There's been a bunch of fixes now from RC1 testing, so I figured it's
about time to put out an RC2. You can find it here, please check it out:
Source tarball:
Nothing showing up on search.maven.org yet, have you released the staging
repo (and dropped the old ones) ?
Robbie
On 28 August 2013 15:20, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
FYI, the artifacts were posted yesterday and should have propagated to all
the mirrors by now. I've also
It looks like the actual issue has been identified on another thread, but
while this is here...I noticed that the mechanisms are in a different order
between the two snippets below, however the 1.0 spec indicates they are to
be ordered in decreasing level of preference which I would expect to make
The Java binaries for 0.6 seem to be MIA. Still sitting in a staging repo
somewhere?
Robbie
On 16 January 2014 10:42, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
The release artifacts for Proton 0.6 are now available from the web site:
http://qpid.apache.org/releases/qpid-proton-0.6/index.html
+1
Robbie
On 22 Apr 2014 12:13, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I haven't heard of any issues in RC4, so I'm going to put this to a formal
vote now:
Source artifacts are here:
- http://people.apache.org/~rhs/qpid-proton-0.7rc4/
Java binaries are here:
-
I think anyone can sign up for ReviewBoard themselves. It certainly didn't
used to be linked to the ASF LDAP in the past, presumably for that reason.
Its probably also worth noting you can initiate pull requests against the
github mirrors. If it hasn't already been done for the proton mirror, we
(which I spotted due to the
Copyright notices we wouldnt typically have) I noticed Encoder.java having
its existing licence header corrupted a little by some wayward code.
Robbie
I just submitted it as a git PR:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/1
On Apr 30, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Robbie
I haven't had time to run any of this or look through it properly yet, but
after a very very quick scroll through...
- Should we not use LinkedHashMap instances, due to the ordering
restriction on equality checks for amqp maps?
- It looked like it only uses list32, array32, string32 for
On 2 July 2014 16:13, Clebert Suconic csuco...@redhat.com wrote:
On Jul 2, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Robbie Gemmell rgemm...@redhat.com wrote:
I have applied the patch via PROTON-628, but with the original
indentation restored to actually make the change appear as simple as it
really
Discussed with Clebert on IRC. There is a threshold where it changes
behaviour and that was set too low, so it has now been raised significantly
such that most people continue seeing the prior behaviour and those who
want it can opt in with the property.
Robbie
On 2 July 2014 16:42, Clebert
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Qpid/job/Qpid-proton-c/ now updated
accordingly.
Robbie
On 27 June 2014 17:08, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
As part of QPID-619 [1]. The location of the developer script config.sh
has changed from the source tree to the build tree.
The
I wasn't able to run the tests via cmake or maven after updating and doing
a clean build, getting complaint: AttributeError: type object
'org.apache.qpid.proton.engine.Event$Category' has no attribute 'PROTOCOL'
As I saw that the CI job completed ok and knew that this was an area being
changed
The directory doesnt exist for Ernie because he used a Git repo. While
there is an empty dir in the source svn repo, anyone using Git will not get
the dir because git only versions files, and so effectively 'doesnt see'
the empty dir precisely because there is nothing in it.
The general solutions
This is definitely something that will need to get done eventually, but it
isn't currently being worked on to my knowledge and is unlikely to be in
0.8 as a result. Patches are welcome though.
Robbie
On 18 September 2014 17:15, Fugitt, Jesse jfug...@informatica.com wrote:
The missing
Hi all,
With Qpid 0.30 we have made the move to requiring Java 7+. Currently,
proton still allows for use of Java 6, so I wonder what peoples thoughts
are on the timing of a similar move for Proton? I'd personally like to do
it soon since Java 6 is EOL, but if not then I think we should at least
,
they seem to work on Java8 (havent tried Java7).
Robbie
On 22 September 2014 21:14, Alan Conway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
My bad, didn't run the java tests. Will fix ASAP and then give myself a
flogging.
On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 19:50 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
This seems to have broken the Java
, Clebert Suconic csuco...@redhat.com wrote:
This is just testing... can't you have a java7 tests folder? you would be
able to still have java7 specific tests.
On Sep 24, 2014, at 7:13 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
With Qpid 0.30 we have made the move
On 25 September 2014 15:00, Alan Conway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 12:19 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
The tests are now running again, but a couple of the URL tests still seem
to be failing on the CI job:
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Qpid/job/Qpid-proton-j
at 15:59 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
On 25 September 2014 15:00, Alan Conway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 12:19 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
The tests are now running again, but a couple of the URL tests still
seem
to be failing on the CI job:
https
, 2014-09-25 at 13:59 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 15:59 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
On 25 September 2014 15:00, Alan Conway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 12:19 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
The tests are now running again, but a couple of the URL
Hi Ernie,
The proton-api module no longer exists, it was merged with proton-j-impl to
form the current proton-j module, so there are snapshots (which are
confusingly named 1.0-SNAPSHOT all the time currently) being made for it
now. The JNI bits were also removed around the same time.
I'm afraid
On 2 October 2014 16:13, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ernie,
The proton-api module no longer exists, it was merged with proton-j-impl
to form the current proton-j module, so there are snapshots
* no snapshots
(which are confusingly named 1.0-SNAPSHOT all the time
ActiveMQ currently uses an AMQP filter to specify the selector string the
broker should use for the consumer. I dont believe Messenger currently
supports specifying filters, however I have next to no experience with
Messenger so perhaps someone with more knowledge can comment.
Robbie
On 2
On 13 October 2014 18:52, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/13/2014 06:40 PM, Alan Conway wrote:
- Original Message -
I rebased the branch on which I have been developing some examples. I
did this using got svn (quite possibly incorrectly) resulting in a
commit to branch
-1 from me unfortunately.
A change I made earlier broke compilation under Java 6 thanks to a single
simple method call I used during testing. Replacing that with 2 simple
method calls fixed compilation under Java 6. Ugh.
http://svn.apache.org/r1631911
Sorry :S
Robbie
On 14 October 2014 21:44,
Hi Clebert,
As a little extra context for readers...with AMQP 1.0, if the client wishes
to use SASL security it first establishes a SASL layer beginning with the
AMQP%d3.1.0.0 header, and then if successfull proceed to establish the
'regular' AMQP connection over it beginning with the
. I don't think it would be too
hard to implement.
The clients I'm working don't know how to negotiate ANONYMOUS. All the
Java clients I'm dealing with now will throw a bad NPE if I don't have this
behaviour.
Should we raise a JIRA?
On Oct 15, 2014, at 6:07 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm
[ X ] Yes, release Proton 0.8 RC4 as 0.8 final.
I ran the C and Java build+tests, tried out the Java binaries with the JMS
client build+tests, all seemed fine.
Robbie
On 23 October 2014 17:21, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I've put together RC4. This is pretty much
[ X ] Yes, release Proton 0.8 RC5 as 0.8 final.
I ran the C and Java build+tests, and tried out the published Java binaries
using the JMS client build+tests.
Aside: doing a binary diff of the archive contents shows a second small
change since RC4, in the python bindings:
[ X ] Yes, migrate the proton repo over to git.
On 30 October 2014 10:59, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I'm planning on updating the release script for 0.9 to automate the last
few details of the release process and to do proper branching. Given that
the release
On 19 February 2015 at 04:22, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Rajith Muditha Attapattu
rajit...@gmail.com wrote:
Setting the message body for an o.a.q.proton.message.Message is slightly
awkward.
You have to create a AmqpValue. AmqpSequence or a
Most of the Jenkins nodes have been replaced since the job was
originally set up. I believe only 'ubuntu3' is left from the older
stock that existed at that time. It is available in its own label
('legacy-ubuntu' https://builds.apache.org/label/legacy-ubuntu/),
which I have just restricted the job
[ +1 ] Yes, release Proton 0.9-rc-2 as 0.9 final
I tested out RC2 as follows:
- Checked license/notice files present.
- Verified sigs and checksums match.
- Built everything using cmake and ran the tests.
- Verified building/running the Qpid C++ broker against proton-c.
- Built proton-j and ran
Dominic has posted a further change for PROTON-834 that fixes a corner
case not seen when making an earlier change in 0.9.
I think we should include it if doing an RC3 to pick up the change
Alan also made earlier.
Robbie
On 16 March 2015 at 12:20, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote
[ +1 ] Yes, release Proton 0.9-rc-3 as 0.9 final
Robbie
On 16 March 2015 at 20:42, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Here's a quick respin of 0.9-rc-3. The only changes from rc-2 are exactly
those two mentioned on the rc-2 vote thread. I've included them at the end
for
On 27 February 2015 at 11:56, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 February 2015 at 17:52, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 12:28 +, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
...
I'm going to post my comments here and on the wiki, as I dont think
many (except
On 2 March 2015 at 19:30, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/24/2015 08:48 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
In a short while when people have had enough time to absorb the proposal
and comment I will post a code review of the actual code changes. As
there are substantial API changes I'd like
Hi all,
I'm sure some of you already noticed me spamming the JIRA projects and
mailing lists already when testing this, but just incase you didnt or
wondered what I was doing...
I asked infra via [1] and [2] to enable/fix some of the extra GitHub
integration bits for our four GitHub mirrors (the
On 26 February 2015 at 17:52, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 12:28 +, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
...
I'm going to post my comments here and on the wiki, as I dont think
many (except maybe you) will actually see them on the wiki ;)
Thank you for the excellent
On 20 February 2015 at 03:57, Rajith Muditha Attapattu
rajit...@gmail.com wrote:
Most of the things I'd consider most awkward about about the current
codebase have little to do with the Message, but rather all the stuff
you need before you get that far.
Changing or improving Message or any of
Could you make the related change be made on the Java bits too?
Presumably its python shim as well?
I happened to mention that stuff in an email yesterday and found this
when I went looking for the C version. Would have been nice if it was
marked deprecated on proton-j at the same time, I would
Always remember the newline to protect against automated signatures? :)
On 26 February 2015 at 09:46, Dominic Evans dominic.ev...@uk.ibm.com wrote:
http://golang.org/cmd/cgo/
:/
--
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
Testing responses via email.
On 26 February 2015 at 10:25, gemmellr g...@git.apache.org wrote:
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/9
PROTON-830: trivial README change, testing GitHub integration
As per the subject.
You can
On 25 February 2015 at 18:40, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 10:27 +0100, Jakub Scholz wrote:
...
But I find this part a bit dangerous:
Classically in protocols where SASL was not optional the way to avoid
double authentication was to use the EXTERNAL SASL
On 23 April 2015 at 14:28, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/23/2015 12:24 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
There are a couple of proton-c changes that while not as critical as the
proton-j stuff would make sense to go out in such a release, e.g. there is
a two line fix that avoids zombie
On 21 April 2015 at 14:48, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 12:52, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
I'm seeing a couple of issues with the recently landed sasl changes. I'm
getting four test failures in the python tests (see details at the end).
I'm
On 21 April 2015 at 12:52, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
I'm seeing a couple of issues with the recently landed sasl changes. I'm
getting four test failures in the python tests (see details at the end).
I'm also seeing interop issues with the proton.js built prior to these
changes,
Hi folks,
Running git-cherry against 0.9 and master to compare their history
since divergence results in the following output. Lines starting with
'-' already have equivalent commits in 0.9 from the RC stages, lines
starting with '+' do not.
I am going to begin going through these and cherry
0.9.x master after the first pass including
commits for proton-j and 1 for proton-c:
http://people.apache.org/~robbie/qpid/proton/0.9.1/git-cherry-pass1.txt
Robbie
On 24 April 2015 at 16:54, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok ignore all that for now. Andrew has noted a problem
to date checkout is not). All the relevant commits
are there, but its not based on the right thing so I'll delete the
branch and redo it over the weekend.
Robbie
On 24 April 2015 at 16:42, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I branched 0.9.x from the 0.9 tag and cherry picked the commits I
in CMakeLists
+ 953f64d7cd03d8ae7d65cacbf875cae7025a0597 NO-JIRA: move jenkins build
script under bin/
+ 2b8d7d851889598feca3c74f3bc862603cf6c95e NO-JIRA: fix jenkins build 'install'
On 24 April 2015 at 13:02, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
Running git-cherry against 0.9
Hi folks,
I would like to propose doing a new release. There have been quite a
few important fixes or changes since 0.9, mainly in proton-j, that I
would like to see made available for use in dependent projects such as
the JMS client. These include things such as preventing a few memory
leaks,
On 21 April 2015 at 17:04, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 14:56 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 14:48, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 12:52, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
I'm seeing a couple
it quickly with confidence I'd like to suggest possibly deferring it,
as we can always do more releases.
Robbie
On 27 April 2015 at 16:43, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok I have now cherry picked the commits mentioned earlier by Gordon,
Rafael, and Dominic.
The current
On 29 April 2015 at 17:38, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/27/2015 01:45 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 04/27/2015 01:14 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
I also added PROTON-858 as a release blocker.
I've been trying to get a fix proposal together for that. I'll post it
for review as soon as
On 29 April 2015 at 20:34, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I've put out an RC for 0.9.1 in the usual places.
Source artifacts are here:
https://people.apache.org/~rhs/qpid-proton-0.9.1-rc1/
Java binaries are here:
The versions of the Proton pom files were changed on master yesterday
to 0.10-SNAPSHOT (i.e next-release-SNAPSHOT), from their previous
constant use of 1.0-SNAPSHOT regardless of the next release version.
As a result of this the nightly snapshot job is now publishing with
the new version, which
On 27 April 2015 at 13:44, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 April 2015 at 13:23, Dominic Evans dominic.ev...@uk.ibm.com wrote:
-Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote: -
I have gone through the git cherry output and categorised the
remaining commits from
.
Robbie
On 25 April 2015 at 21:10, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
New 0.9.x branch created, against the actual 0.9 tag this time. I have
updated the JIRAs for the all the commits included so far to add the
0.9.1 fix version. If you want any commits included, either git
cherry-pick
, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/27/2015 12:46 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I have gone through the git cherry output and categorised the
remaining commits from master that dont have a direct equivalent on
the 0.9.x branch, splitting according to what they update
On 27 April 2015 at 13:07, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/27/2015 12:46 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I have gone through the git cherry output and categorised the
remaining commits from master that dont have a direct equivalent on
the 0.9.x branch, splitting according to what
On 27 April 2015 at 13:23, Dominic Evans dominic.ev...@uk.ibm.com wrote:
-Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote: -
I have gone through the git cherry output and categorised the
remaining commits from master that dont have a direct equivalent on
the 0.9.x branch, splitting
://people.apache.org/~robbie/qpid/proton/0.9.1/git-cherry-pass2.txt
Robbie
On 27 April 2015 at 12:46, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I have gone through the git cherry output and categorised the
remaining commits from master that dont have a direct equivalent on
the 0.9.x branch, splitting
On 1 May 2015 at 13:53, Chuck Rolke cro...@redhat.com wrote:
I ran the patched map fix in the original environment where the issue was
first spotted.
* Without the fix 4 of 10 tests failed within the first minute.
* With the fix 0 of 20 tests failed within the first minute.
This is a great
On 29 April 2015 at 21:05, Ken Giusti kgiu...@redhat.com wrote:
Well, done enough to consider merging to master.
While the patch is quite large, most of the changes are simple syntax changes
to avoid non-python3 compliant syntax.
The code is available on the kgiusti-python3 branch at the
On 30 April 2015 at 15:56, Ken Giusti kgiu...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
To: proton@qpid.apache.org
Cc: us...@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:20:07 AM
Subject: Re: Python 3 port is 'done'
On 29 April 2015
The Java test runs have apparently been failing since the last few
commits went in for the Go bits.
https://builds.apache.org/job/Qpid-proton-j/
Robbie
On 6 May 2015 at 00:48, Alan Conway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
First serious stab at a concurrent Go API for proton with working examples
Hi folks,
Our quarterly report to the board is due by Wed 13th. I have written
an initial draft which you can find below. Let me know if you have any
additions/changes before I submit it on Monday.
Robbie
===
Apache Qpid is a project focused on creating software based on the
Advanced
On 7 May 2015 at 11:58, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, sent to the wrong p*@q.a.o mailing list, oops. No harm, there
isnt anything in it to be kept private. As it isnt proton specific,
adding dev@ as well.
Robbie
On 7 May 2015 at 11:42, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm
On 6 May 2015 at 15:54, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
Moving to the user list as this is a more general topic.
On 05/06/2015 12:41 PM, Dominic Evans wrote:
When we were implementing the MQ Light broker, we wanted to be able
to support sharing of subscriptions across a group of clients -
On 30 April 2015 at 13:04, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
The versions of the Proton pom files were changed on master yesterday
to 0.10-SNAPSHOT (i.e next-release-SNAPSHOT), from their previous
constant use of 1.0-SNAPSHOT regardless of the next release version.
As a result
On 16 April 2015 at 20:38, Ken Giusti kgiu...@redhat.com wrote:
And within moments, I hit my first Really Big Problem:
Jython
Yep, turns out Jython can't parse 'futurized' python code. Especially
dislikes the
except exception, var --- except exception as var
change. Which isn't
On 16 April 2015 at 23:03, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 April 2015 at 20:38, Ken Giusti kgiu...@redhat.com wrote:
And within moments, I hit my first Really Big Problem:
Jython
Yep, turns out Jython can't parse 'futurized' python code. Especially
dislikes
I'm not seeing that currently, but I have seen similar sort of things
a couple of times in the past.
As you mention, some files get created in the source tree (presumably
by or due to use of Jython), outwith the normal build areas they would
be (which would lead to them being cleaned up), and I
Hi folks,
Just an FYI that I have updated the Jenkins job publishing the
proton-j snapshots to use JDK7. The job previously used JDK6, but has
been failing recently, apparently because infra put Nexus behind a new
SSL proxy which thus far at least breaks deploying anything using
JDK6.
The source
On 22 June 2015 at 19:14, aconway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:38 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
I'd like to get the proton-j-reactor branch into 0.10 also. It should
be
ready soon, so if py3k can be sorted and merged in a similar
timeframe we
could target a release for
On 8 May 2015 at 13:34, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 30 April 2015 at 15:56, Ken Giusti kgiu...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
The JIRA project is at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON
Details of JIRA projects etc for each component are listed on the
website, e.g. http://qpid.apache.org/proton/ in this case.
Robbie
On 28 May 2015 at 20:46, Michael Ivanov iv...@isle.spb.ru wrote:
Sorry, how do I create a JIRA
Hi all,
Short intro:
The way we use the outgoing-window feels wrong, and seems to violate
at least one bit of the related [and unclear overall] description in
the spec. The way we use it means we currently can't send messages to
ServiceBus in many cases (likely anything-but-messenger).
Full
.
Robbie
On 2 July 2015 at 00:15, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks James. Some expansion which may be useful to add.
When comparing the older JMS client, proton-c via the Messenger API,
and the new JMS client using proton-j, its important to note that they
aren't all doing
This seems to be resulting in segfaults running the tests on Windows:
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/ke4qqq/qpid-proton/build/0.10-SNAPSHOT-master.122
1: proton_tests.message.CodecTest.testRoundTrip
pass
1: proton_tests.message.CodecTest.testRoundTripWithTimes
The recent changes on Proton-J seemed to have created some issues:
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Qpid/job/Qpid-proton-j/1032/console
The module currently requries Java 7 to compile, which is a slightly
out of sync with the compiler source+target still being set to Java 6
(which the
that this is as
expected?
--Rafael
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
The recent changes on Proton-J seemed to have created some issues:
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Qpid/job/Qpid-proton-j/1032/console
The module currently requries Java 7
needing any help from a prior cmake build.
--Rafael
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Were you running it after having previously used the cmake build in
the same terminal?
I do indeed have the definition in ctypes, with the cproton file
On 6 July 2015 at 14:17, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/06/2015 01:24 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
Can you try doing an mvn clean and seeing if it is still an issue?
I see the same thing after mvn clean
Does cleaning the checkout as a whole make any difference?
To preview what
Is this change allowing clients to skip the SASL layer when connecting
to servers that have enabled the SASL layer? If so, how is the new
default behaviour disabled?
The existing but unimplemented 'allowSkip' method previously intended
to enable such behaviour still doesn't do anything, so is
On 6 July 2015 at 16:51, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 11:30 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote:
I wired in allowSkip in a very minimal way just to restore the ability to
force the old behaviour. It would be a fairly trivial to change the name of
course,
I'm
On 6 July 2015 at 18:14, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 17:48 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
...
The old toggle only used to define whether sasl was required or not
(which it historically was once you enabled the sasl layer, and the
toggle was never
On 6 July 2015 at 16:48, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/06/2015 04:08 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
Any sort of missing class really should be a compile time exception, which
I think means you must have stale class files *somewhere*. You could try
doing a find checkout -name *.class
On 6 July 2015 at 18:24, aconway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 17:31 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, aconway wrote:
On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 16:48 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 07/06/2015 04:08 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
Any sort of missing class really
1 - 100 of 595 matches
Mail list logo
