You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by db...@apache.org on 2006/09/04 17:12:00 UTC
Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Geronimo - Monday, September 4, 2006
10 Patches in RTC
[GERONIMO-2354] Replace concurrent with backport-concurrent-util
- Assignee: Unassigned
- Reporter: Jason Dillon
- Created: Sun Aug 27 21:53:39 PDT 2006
- Updated: Tue Aug 29 19:39:58 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2354
[GERONIMO-903] Update Log4J usage from 1.2.8 to latest maintenance version of 1.2.13
- Assignee: Jason Dillon
- Reporter: Donald Woods
- Created: Tue Aug 23 16:02:38 PDT 2005
- Updated: Thu Aug 31 23:13:51 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-903
[GERONIMO-2015] Let's replace JKS to PKCS12 key store type
- Assignee: Unassigned
- Reporter: Nikolay Chugunov
- Created: Fri May 12 14:54:17 PDT 2006
- Updated: Thu Aug 10 10:59:06 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2015
[GERONIMO-2332] RTC Put the generated xmlbeans files for the j2ee 1.4 schemas in svn in a spec module so we don't need the schemas in svn at all
- Assignee: David Jencks
- Reporter: David Jencks
- Created: Fri Aug 18 13:13:47 PDT 2006
- Updated: Fri Aug 25 18:32:52 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2332
[GERONIMO-2365] Upgrade Derby to 10.1.3.1
- Assignee: Jason Dillon
- Reporter: Jason Dillon
- Created: Wed Aug 30 17:10:25 PDT 2006
- Updated: Thu Aug 31 16:31:44 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2365
[GERONIMO-2163] WADI Integration for Jetty
- Assignee: Gianny Damour
- Reporter: Gianny Damour
- Created: Sun Jul 02 14:16:35 PDT 2006
- Updated: Fri Sep 01 08:33:50 PDT 2006
- Votes: 1
1 David Jencks
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2163
[GERONIMO-2349] jta 1.1 support with container manager jpa support in transaction module
- Assignee: David Jencks
- Reporter: David Jencks
- Created: Wed Aug 23 13:22:37 PDT 2006
- Updated: Thu Aug 31 13:49:47 PDT 2006
- Votes: 1
1 David Blevins
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2349
[GERONIMO-2248] Applications portlets: List Parent and Child components against each component
- Assignee: Unassigned
- Reporter: Vamsavardhana Reddy
- Created: Sun Jul 30 08:15:34 PDT 2006
- Updated: Sat Aug 19 10:44:11 PDT 2006
- Votes: 1
1 Donald Woods
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2248
[GERONIMO-2358] Move java ee 5 specs into specs trunk
- Assignee: David Blevins
- Reporter: David Blevins
- Created: Mon Aug 28 17:21:48 PDT 2006
- Updated: Mon Aug 28 17:26:11 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2358
[GERONIMO-2364] Update geronimo to use ActiveMQ 4.1.x
- Assignee: Hiram Chirino
- Reporter: Hiram Chirino
- Created: Tue Aug 29 12:21:46 PDT 2006
- Updated: Thu Aug 31 22:46:27 PDT 2006
- Votes: 0
- http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2364
NOTE: This email is generated and does not constitute and offical
vote or vote result. All official voting is done on the dev list.
If you do not see your issue here, click the "Begin RTC Review"
link under the "Available Workflow Actions" of the JIRA page.
If you do not see your vote here, click the "Vote" link under the
"Operations" section of the JIRA page.
*** ALL COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO VOTE ***
Template: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/gbuild/jirareports/patchesInRtc.vm
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Bill Dudney <bd...@apache.org>.
feel the power!
;-|
On Sep 4, 2006, at 2:56 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> Your votes count as much as my votes count at the moment :-P
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:50 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>
>> Hey Jason,
>>
>> Yep, time lag is an issue. My votes don't even count, I'm just
>> trying to help get/keep the ball rolling on these patches.
>>
>> I won't post any new patches cause then it might appear that I'm
>> signing up for continuos rediff duty :-)
>>
>> TTFN,
>>
>> -bd-
>>
>> On Sep 4, 2006, at 2:21 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>>>>> From your comments I don't think you fixed the configs/client/
>>>>> pom.xml and/or you might have had something stale in your
>>>>> assembly.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I mentioned, I just re-tested the patch and there were no
>>>>> errors.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll retest, is it worth posting a new patch? Would make it
>>>> slightly easier for others to test the patch.
>>>
>>> Eh... if more hunks failed I might... but the longer we wait to
>>> apply the more chances that more hunks will fail... and so I
>>> don't want to sign up to continuously rediff.
>>>
>>> :-\
>>>
>>>
>>>>> From the stack you posted, it does not look like you updated
>>>>> ActiveMQManagerGBean as I mentioned was the fix for this
>>>>> exception ( its the comment right before your stack :-P )
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dooh! how about a new patch that includes the NPE fix. I'd be
>>>> glad to post it if you think its worth it. I think this one is
>>>> definitely worth it cause it makes it simply patch, rebuild,
>>>> test instead of having to manually edit stuff.
>>>
>>> Eh... if you feel like it... though that just means that I gotta
>>> reverify it. :-\
>>>
>>> Blah, this should just get committed. The lag from patch to
>>> verify to commit is too much, its just causing more overhead.
>>>
>>> If this keeps up I may go back to a branch in the sandbox.
>>>
>>> --jason
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
Your votes count as much as my votes count at the moment :-P
--jason
On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:50 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
> Hey Jason,
>
> Yep, time lag is an issue. My votes don't even count, I'm just
> trying to help get/keep the ball rolling on these patches.
>
> I won't post any new patches cause then it might appear that I'm
> signing up for continuos rediff duty :-)
>
> TTFN,
>
> -bd-
>
> On Sep 4, 2006, at 2:21 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>>>> From your comments I don't think you fixed the configs/client/
>>>> pom.xml and/or you might have had something stale in your assembly.
>>>>
>>>> As I mentioned, I just re-tested the patch and there were no
>>>> errors.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll retest, is it worth posting a new patch? Would make it
>>> slightly easier for others to test the patch.
>>
>> Eh... if more hunks failed I might... but the longer we wait to
>> apply the more chances that more hunks will fail... and so I don't
>> want to sign up to continuously rediff.
>>
>> :-\
>>
>>
>>>> From the stack you posted, it does not look like you updated
>>>> ActiveMQManagerGBean as I mentioned was the fix for this
>>>> exception ( its the comment right before your stack :-P )
>>>>
>>>
>>> Dooh! how about a new patch that includes the NPE fix. I'd be
>>> glad to post it if you think its worth it. I think this one is
>>> definitely worth it cause it makes it simply patch, rebuild, test
>>> instead of having to manually edit stuff.
>>
>> Eh... if you feel like it... though that just means that I gotta
>> reverify it. :-\
>>
>> Blah, this should just get committed. The lag from patch to
>> verify to commit is too much, its just causing more overhead.
>>
>> If this keeps up I may go back to a branch in the sandbox.
>>
>> --jason
>>
>>
>
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Bill Dudney <bd...@mac.com>.
Hey Jason,
Yep, time lag is an issue. My votes don't even count, I'm just trying
to help get/keep the ball rolling on these patches.
I won't post any new patches cause then it might appear that I'm
signing up for continuos rediff duty :-)
TTFN,
-bd-
On Sep 4, 2006, at 2:21 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>>> From your comments I don't think you fixed the configs/client/
>>> pom.xml and/or you might have had something stale in your assembly.
>>>
>>> As I mentioned, I just re-tested the patch and there were no errors.
>>>
>>
>> I'll retest, is it worth posting a new patch? Would make it
>> slightly easier for others to test the patch.
>
> Eh... if more hunks failed I might... but the longer we wait to
> apply the more chances that more hunks will fail... and so I don't
> want to sign up to continuously rediff.
>
> :-\
>
>
>>> From the stack you posted, it does not look like you updated
>>> ActiveMQManagerGBean as I mentioned was the fix for this
>>> exception ( its the comment right before your stack :-P )
>>>
>>
>> Dooh! how about a new patch that includes the NPE fix. I'd be glad
>> to post it if you think its worth it. I think this one is
>> definitely worth it cause it makes it simply patch, rebuild, test
>> instead of having to manually edit stuff.
>
> Eh... if you feel like it... though that just means that I gotta
> reverify it. :-\
>
> Blah, this should just get committed. The lag from patch to verify
> to commit is too much, its just causing more overhead.
>
> If this keeps up I may go back to a branch in the sandbox.
>
> --jason
>
>
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>> From your comments I don't think you fixed the configs/client/
>> pom.xml and/or you might have had something stale in your assembly.
>>
>> As I mentioned, I just re-tested the patch and there were no errors.
>>
>
> I'll retest, is it worth posting a new patch? Would make it
> slightly easier for others to test the patch.
Eh... if more hunks failed I might... but the longer we wait to apply
the more chances that more hunks will fail... and so I don't want to
sign up to continuously rediff.
:-\
>> From the stack you posted, it does not look like you updated
>> ActiveMQManagerGBean as I mentioned was the fix for this exception
>> ( its the comment right before your stack :-P )
>>
>
> Dooh! how about a new patch that includes the NPE fix. I'd be glad
> to post it if you think its worth it. I think this one is
> definitely worth it cause it makes it simply patch, rebuild, test
> instead of having to manually edit stuff.
Eh... if you feel like it... though that just means that I gotta
reverify it. :-\
Blah, this should just get committed. The lag from patch to verify
to commit is too much, its just causing more overhead.
If this keeps up I may go back to a branch in the sandbox.
--jason
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Bill Dudney <bd...@apache.org>.
On Sep 4, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> On Sep 4, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>>> [GERONIMO-2354] Replace concurrent with backport-concurrent-util
>>> - Assignee: Unassigned
>>> - Reporter: Jason Dillon
>>> - Created: Sun Aug 27 21:53:39 PDT 2006
>>> - Updated: Tue Aug 29 19:39:58 PDT 2006
>>> - Votes: 0
>>> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2354
>>>
>>
>> -1 patch does not work for me - but it looks like a simple
>> dependency problem from the log, I updated the issue with the
>> stack trace
>
> From your comments I don't think you fixed the configs/client/
> pom.xml and/or you might have had something stale in your assembly.
>
> As I mentioned, I just re-tested the patch and there were no errors.
>
I'll retest, is it worth posting a new patch? Would make it slightly
easier for others to test the patch.
>
>>> [GERONIMO-2364] Update geronimo to use ActiveMQ 4.1.x
>>> - Assignee: Hiram Chirino
>>> - Reporter: Hiram Chirino
>>> - Created: Tue Aug 29 12:21:46 PDT 2006
>>> - Updated: Thu Aug 31 22:46:27 PDT 2006
>>> - Votes: 0
>>> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2364
>>>
>>
>> -1 tried this patch and got a stack trace - I updated the jira
>
> From the stack you posted, it does not look like you updated
> ActiveMQManagerGBean as I mentioned was the fix for this exception
> ( its the comment right before your stack :-P )
>
Dooh! how about a new patch that includes the NPE fix. I'd be glad to
post it if you think its worth it. I think this one is definitely
worth it cause it makes it simply patch, rebuild, test instead of
having to manually edit stuff.
TTFN,
-bd-
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
On Sep 4, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
>> [GERONIMO-2354] Replace concurrent with backport-concurrent-util
>> - Assignee: Unassigned
>> - Reporter: Jason Dillon
>> - Created: Sun Aug 27 21:53:39 PDT 2006
>> - Updated: Tue Aug 29 19:39:58 PDT 2006
>> - Votes: 0
>> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2354
>>
>
> -1 patch does not work for me - but it looks like a simple
> dependency problem from the log, I updated the issue with the stack
> trace
From your comments I don't think you fixed the configs/client/
pom.xml and/or you might have had something stale in your assembly.
As I mentioned, I just re-tested the patch and there were no errors.
>> [GERONIMO-2364] Update geronimo to use ActiveMQ 4.1.x
>> - Assignee: Hiram Chirino
>> - Reporter: Hiram Chirino
>> - Created: Tue Aug 29 12:21:46 PDT 2006
>> - Updated: Thu Aug 31 22:46:27 PDT 2006
>> - Votes: 0
>> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2364
>>
>
> -1 tried this patch and got a stack trace - I updated the jira
From the stack you posted, it does not look like you updated
ActiveMQManagerGBean as I mentioned was the fix for this exception
( its the comment right before your stack :-P )
--jason
Re: Patches in RTC (Geronimo - 2006-09-04)
Posted by Bill Dudney <bd...@apache.org>.
On Sep 4, 2006, at 9:12 AM, dblevins@apache.org wrote:
> Geronimo - Monday, September 4, 2006
>
> 10 Patches in RTC
>
> [GERONIMO-2354] Replace concurrent with backport-concurrent-util
> - Assignee: Unassigned
> - Reporter: Jason Dillon
> - Created: Sun Aug 27 21:53:39 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Tue Aug 29 19:39:58 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2354
>
-1 patch does not work for me - but it looks like a simple dependency
problem from the log, I updated the issue with the stack trace
> [GERONIMO-903] Update Log4J usage from 1.2.8 to latest
> maintenance version of 1.2.13
> - Assignee: Jason Dillon
> - Reporter: Donald Woods
> - Created: Tue Aug 23 16:02:38 PDT 2005
> - Updated: Thu Aug 31 23:13:51 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-903
>
+1 - built, deployed and appeared to log just fine, I deployed a
DataSource and an ear and no unexpected logs came out on the console
and the ones I expected to show up did.
> [GERONIMO-2015] Let's replace JKS to PKCS12 key store type
> - Assignee: Unassigned
> - Reporter: Nikolay Chugunov
> - Created: Fri May 12 14:54:17 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Thu Aug 10 10:59:06 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2015
>
+0 (no opinion) From the JIRA it was not clear what to do with this
one for me so I did not try it.
> [GERONIMO-2332] RTC Put the generated xmlbeans files for the
> j2ee 1.4 schemas in svn in a spec module so we don't need the
> schemas in svn at all
> - Assignee: David Jencks
> - Reporter: David Jencks
> - Created: Fri Aug 18 13:13:47 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Fri Aug 25 18:32:52 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2332
>
+0 (no opinion) was not sure what to apply on this one either.
> [GERONIMO-2365] Upgrade Derby to 10.1.3.1
> - Assignee: Jason Dillon
> - Reporter: Jason Dillon
> - Created: Wed Aug 30 17:10:25 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Thu Aug 31 16:31:44 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2365
>
+1 with the additional patch I attached (the test deployables still
had dependency on 10.1.1.0)
> [GERONIMO-2163] WADI Integration for Jetty
> - Assignee: Gianny Damour
> - Reporter: Gianny Damour
> - Created: Sun Jul 02 14:16:35 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Fri Sep 01 08:33:50 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 1
> 1 David Jencks
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2163
>
+0 (no opinion) Looked like there was still alot of churn on what
needs to be done here to test so I left it alone.
> [GERONIMO-2349] jta 1.1 support with container manager jpa
> support in transaction module
> - Assignee: David Jencks
> - Reporter: David Jencks
> - Created: Wed Aug 23 13:22:37 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Thu Aug 31 13:49:47 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 1
> 1 David Blevins
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2349
>
+0 not sure what to apply and do to test this patch
> [GERONIMO-2248] Applications portlets: List Parent and Child
> components against each component
> - Assignee: Unassigned
> - Reporter: Vamsavardhana Reddy
> - Created: Sun Jul 30 08:15:34 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Sat Aug 19 10:44:11 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 1
> 1 Donald Woods
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2248
>
+0 Not clear that Aaron's concerns were addressed
> [GERONIMO-2358] Move java ee 5 specs into specs trunk
> - Assignee: David Blevins
> - Reporter: David Blevins
> - Created: Mon Aug 28 17:21:48 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Mon Aug 28 17:26:11 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2358
+1 - we should do this ASAP IMO
>
> [GERONIMO-2364] Update geronimo to use ActiveMQ 4.1.x
> - Assignee: Hiram Chirino
> - Reporter: Hiram Chirino
> - Created: Tue Aug 29 12:21:46 PDT 2006
> - Updated: Thu Aug 31 22:46:27 PDT 2006
> - Votes: 0
> - http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2364
>
-1 tried this patch and got a stack trace - I updated the jira
>
> NOTE: This email is generated and does not constitute and offical
> vote or vote result. All official voting is done on the dev list.
>
> If you do not see your issue here, click the "Begin RTC Review"
> link under the "Available Workflow Actions" of the JIRA page.
>
> If you do not see your vote here, click the "Vote" link under the
> "Operations" section of the JIRA page.
>
>
> *** ALL COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO VOTE ***
>
> Template: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/gbuild/
> jirareports/patchesInRtc.vm