Thanks, these are now approved.
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
OK - two more fixes resulting from testing / bug reports:
1) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6076 :
Keith spotted that the Java Broker got a NullPointerException when
Thanks, all approved.
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Keith W keith.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Justin
Two more to add to the list:
QPID-6079 Some python AlternateExchangeTests fail against Java broker (and
leave behind an exchange that cannot be deleted)
This corrects a problem that
Hello Justin
Two more to add to the list:
QPID-6079 Some python AlternateExchangeTests fail against Java broker (and
leave behind an exchange that cannot be deleted)
This corrects a problem that causes an inconsistency in the registry of
exchanges within the Java Broker exposed by one of the
Hello Justin
May I request one more defect fix in 0.30? I expect this will be the last
request from me.
QPID-6068 NPE encountered whilst editing JMX_CONNECTOR port
revs 1622677,1622747,1622768
This jira fixes an issue encountered when the user edits certain ports of
the Java Broker. There is
Hi Justin
One request for inclusion into 0.30 from me:
QPID-6066 r1622176 [0-8..0-9-1] Client AMQSession#getQueueDepth() call
fails against pre 0.30 java brokers
This change addresses an interoperability issue affecting the non JMS API
call AMQSession#getQueueDepth when using 0-8 to 0-9-1
Thanks, approved.
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Keith W keith.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Justin
One request for inclusion into 0.30 from me:
QPID-6066 r1622176 [0-8..0-9-1] Client AMQSession#getQueueDepth() call
fails against pre 0.30 java brokers
This change addresses
Thanks, now approved.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Justin,
another small one:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6031 : If attempting to
connect over SSL to a server whose certificate is not trusted, ensure a
meaningful error
OK - hopefully this will be the last one from me :-)
QPID-6052 : [Java Client] The client does not correctly set the
JMSDestination on a 0-9-1 message in ADDR mode
Commits:
https://svn.apache.org/r1621143
https://svn.apache.org/r1621148
https://svn.apache.org/r1621149
Thanks, approved.
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
OK - hopefully this will be the last one from me :-)
QPID-6052 : [Java Client] The client does not correctly set the
JMSDestination on a 0-9-1 message in ADDR mode
Commits:
Hi Justin,
another small one:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6031 : If attempting to connect
over SSL to a server whose certificate is not trusted, ensure a meaningful
error message is generated.
https://svn.apache.org/r1621767
It's a one line change with no impact other than to
A couple more defects found today when testing the Java Broker with AMQP
1.0 where it would be really good to get the fixes in before the RC:
1. QPID-6054: Java Broker does not honour request for receiver settles
first links
https://svn.apache.org/r1621281
One line fix to a clear defect, impact
Thanks, they're now approved.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com
wrote:
A couple more defects found today when testing the Java Broker with AMQP
1.0 where it would be really good to get the fixes in before the RC:
1. QPID-6054: Java Broker does not honour
Thanks - they're now merged
On 29 August 2014 22:28, Justin Ross jr...@apache.org wrote:
Thanks, they're now approved.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com
wrote:
A couple more defects found today when testing the Java Broker with AMQP
1.0 where it
Hi Justin,
Cory Adams [1] discovered a bug in the JMS AMQP 1.0 client handling of a
System Property which prevents JVM wide setting of the synchronous publish
behaviour. While there is a workaround (to set it on the connection URL
for each connection), the fix [2] is isolated to this client and
; jr...@apache.org
Subject: Request For Inclusion into 0.30 (QPID-6050)
Hi Justin,
Cory Adams [1] discovered a bug in the JMS AMQP 1.0 client handling of a System
Property which prevents JVM wide setting of the synchronous publish behaviour.
While there is a workaround (to set
and testing.
Thank you,
Cory
-Original Message-
From: Rob Godfrey [mailto:rob.j.godf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:49 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org; jr...@apache.org
Subject: Request For Inclusion into 0.30 (QPID-6050)
Hi Justin,
Cory Adams [1] discovered a bug
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:49 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org; jr...@apache.org
Subject: Request For Inclusion into 0.30 (QPID-6050)
Hi Justin,
Cory Adams [1] discovered a bug in the JMS AMQP 1.0 client handling of a
System Property which prevents JVM wide setting
I have now merged/made the remaining (Rob got many of them with his merges
earlier) changes for the empty dirs to the 0.30 branch:
http://svn.apache.org/r1620832
http://svn.apache.org/r1620833
I also made updates to the license and notice files based on my comments
from testing beta1:
Hi Justin,
I would like to request an inclusion of Java Broker BDB HA security fix (
committed into trunk under revision https://svn.apache.org/r1620882 and
documented in QPID-6048) into 0.30 .
We discovered a bug with an intruder protection for BDB HA solution
implemented as part of
Hi Justin,
Arising out of Fraser's interoperability testing of the Java Broker with
Messenger today, there's a couple of change that I'd like to get in to 0.30
(and should really be considered out of the scope of the more general
request of mine to merge everything that was on trunk for Java as
Thanks, Rob. Both are now approved.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Justin,
Arising out of Fraser's interoperability testing of the Java Broker with
Messenger today, there's a couple of change that I'd like to get in to 0.30
(and should
OK - I'm going to start merging everything that's on trunk for the Java
build onto the 0.30 branch now...
-- Rob
On 22 August 2014 15:00, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
OK - if everyone is happy, I'll make sure that the Java stuff (including
Fraser's QMF piece) is working on
... and that should be all the merging done, and all the relevant JIRAs
updated to set their fix for version to 0.30.
-- Rob
On 25 August 2014 16:44, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
OK - I'm going to start merging everything that's on trunk for the Java
build onto the 0.30 branch
Given the number of changes I think it might be better to simply request a
general exception from the normal Beta release process.
Unfortunately us Java guys are running a little behind schedule, and at the
point the Beta was cut, the Java code was not really releasable - a lot of
stuff not
On 08/22/2014 12:51 PM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
Given the number of changes I think it might be better to simply request a
general exception from the normal Beta release process.
Unfortunately us Java guys are running a little behind schedule, and at the
point the Beta was cut, the Java code was not
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com
wrote:
Given the number of changes I think it might be better to simply request a
general exception from the normal Beta release process.
Unfortunately us Java guys are running a little behind schedule, and at the
point the
On 22 August 2014 13:01, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/22/2014 12:51 PM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
Given the number of changes I think it might be better to simply request a
general exception from the normal Beta release process.
Unfortunately us Java guys are running a little behind
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Equally, if the release branch is created off-schedule, it would probably
be a good idea to give a heads up when it is actually going to be created.
I agree. I will try to do better in the future.
OK - if everyone is happy, I'll make sure that the Java stuff (including
Fraser's QMF piece) is working on Monday morning and merge that to the
branch. I'll update all affected JIRAs to change their fixFor version too
Apologies again,
Rob
On 22 August 2014 14:41, Justin Ross jr...@apache.org
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6012
Low risk fix to a logging bug, not a functional problem but makes the
logs very cluttered with meaningless notice-level scary-looking
messages. Reviewed by Gordon Sim.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6012
License header fixes coming from the beta, commits:
https://svn.apache.org/r1618218
https://svn.apache.org/r1617774
via https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-5813
Robbie
Approved. To streamline things, please consider any further changes of the
same nature (license headers, empty files or directories) approved as well.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
License header fixes coming from the beta, commits:
Thanks, now merged.
I will hold off on the empty dirs changes for now. They currently wont
merge due to changes on trunk since the branch was made, but I think some
of those changes might get requested for inclusion soon. Either way, we can
just do a sweep of the branch prior to the RC.
Robbie
33 matches
Mail list logo
