[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1838?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12566049#action_12566049
]
Amita Vadhavkar commented on TUSCANY-1838:
--
See below analysis of what I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1514?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Amita Vadhavkar resolved TUSCANY-1514.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Revision 564600 contains the code fix in DataHelperImpl.toDate()
Conversation does not continue if a Service Reference is passed as a return
value (not as a parameter)
--
Key: TUSCANY-2028
URL:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2028?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel Stucky updated TUSCANY-2028:
---
Attachment: test.zip
This is a small eclipse project. Inside you find 3 Interfaces Alpha,
[I'm cross posting to tuscany-dev and tuscany-user again, to be sure all the
Tuscany community sees this. Please usereply rather than reply-all so
that we keep responses to the user list, to help make following the thread
easier and continue to reach the wider audience]
Some of you may be aware
On Jan 31, 2008 1:41 PM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to get some discussion going on what we want to do for graduating
to an Apache TLP.
The attempt back in November raised issues about diversity and since then
it feels like we've just been waiting around hoping diversity
On Feb 6, 2008 10:23 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 1:41 PM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to get some discussion going on what we want to do for
graduating to an Apache TLP.
The attempt back in November raised issues about diversity and since
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1999?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12566099#action_12566099
]
Thomas Greenwood commented on TUSCANY-1999:
---
JDKInvocationHandler and
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1999?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12566100#action_12566100
]
Thomas Greenwood commented on TUSCANY-1999:
---
One other piece of explanation is
On Feb 6, 2008 10:27 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 6, 2008 10:23 AM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 1:41 PM, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to get some discussion going on what we want to do for
graduating to an Apache TLP.
On Feb 4, 2008 8:06 PM, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- route the JIRA traffic out of the dev list as suggested by Matthieu
I understand that this traffic can get a bit overwhelming at times, but
I'd like to make the case that it does have value for new developers
(though not
We've about 170 open JIRAs for SCA, (currently split over 3 versions but
i'll go move all the SCA ones to SCA-next), what shall we do about them?
There's various suggestions for how to improve JIRA handling listed at:
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Graduation+Next+Steps,
I like to be able to look at a JIRA and readily find the discussion relating
to it, so I find having technical discussion as a series of comments in the
JIRA helpful. In this pattern it makes sense to copy JIRA comments to the
dev list, as it forms the substance of our technical communication. I
If we are going to remove JIRAs from dev list, my personal preference
would be to have a notification list and have JIRA, Build
notifications, etc sent to this list. But I'm still not convinced that
moving JIRA out of the dev mailing list is the best solution here.
On Feb 6, 2008 5:26 AM, ant
I was initially thinking about the interceptors. But I realized that service
binding providers usually don't add an interceptor to the invocation chain.
Instead, they register a listener to the binding protocol layer to route the
call into SCA. If the service provider receives data from a
My top 3 in
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Graduation+Next+Stepsare
11,12,13,19,22,32/33,38 and 18 but modified to have a policy of being
vocal early when no-one has the bandwidth to address an incoming JIRA. I
know that's not 3, but hey!
I can't see on the wiki page
Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Typically these discussions have multiple aspects to it and we end up
bringing perspectives to each aspect. If there is such a topic then I'd
think the WIKI is a good place. There could be one description of the
problem and comments by the community at various points.
sebb wrote:
On 05/02/2008, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
- route the JIRA traffic out of the dev list as suggested by Matthieu
I understand that this traffic can get a bit overwhelming at times, but
I'd like to make
Do we really need a sample for this? I've been wondering if our samples
are getting a bit out of control and we're using them as tests instead of
things that users would really want to see. For this JMS case the
binding.jms element in the .composite would be identical to whats already
there for
Raymond Feng wrote:
I was initially thinking about the interceptors. But I realized that
service binding providers usually don't add an interceptor to the
invocation chain. Instead, they register a listener to the binding
protocol layer to route the call into SCA. If the service provider
I prefer to keep the JIRA notifications on the tuscany-dev list. IMHO, we
developers should pay attensions to issues in addition to adding features
:-). In some projects like Axis2, they seem to use JIRA to drive the
development activities. A simple mail filter can help organize the inbox if
I have been looking at the PolicyHandler support for Java implementations
and overall I like the direction this is going. I have some comments about
it.
1. If a given component/operation has multiple policy sets that are handled
by the same PolicyHandler, it appears that one PolicyHandler is
Hi,
When we run a Tuscany application with binding.ws in the J2SE (w/ embedded
Jetty or Tomcat), the base URI of the service binding is
http://locahost:port/. If we package the same artifacts into a WAR and
deploy it to a web container such as Tomcat, the base URI becomes
On Feb 6, 2008 3:28 PM, Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
When we run a Tuscany application with binding.ws in the J2SE (w/ embedded
Jetty or Tomcat), the base URI of the service binding is
http://locahost:port/. If we package the same artifacts into a WAR and
deploy it to a web
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-67?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12566484#action_12566484
]
Amita Vadhavkar commented on TUSCANY-67:
there has some work done in this area and
25 matches
Mail list logo
