You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@activemq.apache.org by stanlyDoge <gi...@git.apache.org> on 2017/12/08 09:53:44 UTC

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

GitHub user stanlyDoge opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697

    ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1341

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/stanlyDoge/activemq-artemis-1 ARTEMIS-1341

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #1697
    
----
commit 5f07d9e93a98ebb112cac46b1bfae352b1747541
Author: Stanislav Knot <sk...@redhat.com>
Date:   2017-12-08T09:34:07Z

    ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

----


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by asfgit <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by clebertsuconic <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @stanlyDoge actually.. my bad.. I had something wrong...
    
    At least I'm watching it ! :)


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by michaelandrepearce <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @stanlyDoge unfortunately it seems there is a build failure of this PR, could you look at it? 


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by stanlyDoge <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user stanlyDoge commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @michaelandrepearce Yes, it should be ready.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

Posted by stanlyDoge <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user stanlyDoge commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    This is just test fix. There are some issues with clients. I'll get back to it later.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

Posted by michaelandrepearce <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @jdanekrh cheers, makes perfect and very obvious sense. *slaps hand against forehead and smashes it on table* it’s been a long few days.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

Posted by michaelandrepearce <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697#discussion_r155747541
  
    --- Diff: tests/integration-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/tests/integration/jms/jms2client/BodyTest.java ---
    @@ -59,13 +58,19 @@ public void testBodyConversion() throws Throwable {
              producer.send(bytesMessage);
     
              Message msg = cons.receiveNoWait();
    -         assertNotNull(msg);
    --- End diff --
    
    this should be kept.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

Posted by michaelandrepearce <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    Behaviour should be the same, which ever JMS client they use, I'm not in favour of behaviours being different, this gives a bad experience to users if one client behaves one way and another behaves another. 


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by michaelandrepearce <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @stanlyDoge is this ready? If so could you squash the commits into one?


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by clebertsuconic <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @stanlyDoge I believe this is breaking the compatiblity testsuite I just added...
    
    I'm glad I did :)


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by stanlyDoge <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user stanlyDoge commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    Oops with squashing. Should be ok now, let's wait for check.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix getBytes

Posted by stanlyDoge <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user stanlyDoge commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    @clebertsuconic double check is better than no check :) Thank you.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

Posted by jdanekrh <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user jdanekrh commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    > Likewise i don't understand why OpenWire is skipped
    
    Skipping OpenWire is appropriate here, as [`Message#getBody`](https://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/javax/jms/Message.html#getBody-java.lang.Class-) was added in JMS 2.0, and activemq-client implements only the 1.1 version of the JMS spec.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1697: ARTEMIS-1341 fix test for getBytes

Posted by stanlyDoge <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user stanlyDoge commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1697
  
    > Behaviour should be the same
    True, there was little misunderstanding. I am working at fix.


---