You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by "ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch" <ra...@bluewin.ch> on 2013/03/17 14:28:35 UTC
Hello all together
Hi
I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and contribute, especially for the OpenEJB part.
I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
I am also contributing from time to time to the Shrinkwrap
Descriptor project.
I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe candidates? As you wrote for
beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
Cheers,
Ralf
Re: Hello all together
Posted by ra...@bluewin.ch.
Hello David
Thank you for your welcome. The area you mentioned looks perfect to me. There are many of those JIRAs interesting for me. I will come back after some investigations and learning task. Then I can ask less stupid questions:-)
Tx, Ralf
On 20.03.13 02:42 David Blevins wrote:
Hello, Ralf!
Welcome aboard. We love having new people, especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large that can still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that fits. One area I think is always a good place for new help is the validation code:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives here:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
That's probably not enough information to completely get started, but hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of those validations look interesting to you?
-David
On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> Hi
>
> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and contribute, especially for the OpenEJB part.
> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> I am also contributing from time to time to the Shrinkwrap
> Descriptor project.
>
> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe candidates? As you wrote for
> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralf
Re: Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ralf,
I think we now use Apache CMS, not sure if we still partly use Confluence.
I think the part of the code used to generate that report and publish it to
confluence needs to be updated so that it could publish using CMS instead.
Here is the code which generates that report:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/ValidationKeysAuditorTest.java?view=markup
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch <
ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> Hi Karan
>
> Thanks for this. Cool:-) I just opened this link.
> I am not sure about the confluence username and password
> as mentioned in the documentation. Do I need to register my self somewhere?
>
> I was a few weeks ago ready to submit a
> patch but I was not sure how to do this...
> Typical beginner problems. And I was busy since then with my company work.
>
>
> Regards,
> Ralf
>
> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> Von: karan.malhi@gmail.com
> Datum: 10.05.2013 17:37
> An: <dev@tomee.apache.
> org>
> Betreff: Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
>
> Ralf,
>
> Nice to see you are working on the validation.
> FYI, Once you ran the th
> validation tests, it would generate a report and post it on confluence, i
> think that part is
> now a bit broken as the generated page is not rendered
> properly. Here is the page which gets generated:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/OPENEJB/validation-keys-audit-report.html . This
> page should tell you which validation keys
> are not currently being tested
> and also the list of keys which have been tested with links to test cases
> which have
> coverage for those keys.
>
> The link provided in the following section of
> http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html is broken.
> "The above command will create a complete test
> coverage report and post it
> to this location OPENEJB:Validation Keys Audit
> Report<openejb:validation-keys-audit-report.
> html>
> "
>
>
> PS: David is being very kind here, he wrote the validation framework and
> basic infrastructure to test it, I
> simply wrote a Testing framework around
> it and in that process asked him tons of questions and bounced ideas in the
>
> list. The dev team was very helpful in driving this framework.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Vishwanath
> Krishnamurthi <
> tovishwanath@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ralf,
> >
> > If you hadn't already seen this- here's a good doc
> > http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html
> >
> > -Vishwa
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, David
> Blevins <david.blevins@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of
> that.
> > > He did an amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations
> > and
> > > ensuring each message key
> is used properly and supports all three levels
> > we
> > > expect.
> > >
> > > I agree, it's some of the better code I've
> seen.
> > >
> > >
> > > -David
> > >
> > > On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi David and
> all contributors. I stepped into the section of the
> > > validation implementation, tests and related source code. I
> never have
> > seen
> > > such a clear design. It is good understandible.
> > > >
> > > > I am impressed:-)
> > > >
> > > > Tx,
> Ralf
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well
> on IRC,
> > somebody
> > > > tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted
> to
> > > the
> > > > ML
> rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
> > > > safety ropes in regards to making sure
> everything is documented and
> > thus
> > > > transparent :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Daniel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> but just to be clear:
> IRC is a really good way to quickly get
> > feedback.
> > > >> But all the important decision making process and
> communication needs
> > > to be
> > > >> on the ASF mailing lists.
> > > >> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't
> happen on the mailing
> > > >> list, it didn't happen" :)
> > > >>
> > > >> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of
> a few good legal
> > > reasons)
> > > >> and the information is only available to a very few people who were
> > > logged
> > >
> >> in to the IRC.
> > > >>
> > > >> LieGrue,
> > > >> strub
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > >>> From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
> > > >>> To: struberg@yahoo.de
> > > >>> Cc:
> > > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:
> 05 AM
> > > >>> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi Ralf,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> we are
> as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
> > > >> over
> > > >>> email...
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cheers
> > >
> >>> Daniel
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Hi
> Daniel
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you
> replied.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I can
> see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are
> > good
> > > >>>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the
> one, I am considering to
> > > >> work on,
> > > >>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon
> as
> >
> > >> they
> > > >>>> arise.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Tx, Ralf
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh
> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Hi Ralf,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that
> you
> > probably
> > > >> meant
> > > >>>> David instead of Daniel ;)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I'd say if you like take
> both if they are available. That's really
> > > >>> up to
> > > >>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort
> out things.
> > Don't
> > > >>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Cheers
> > > >>>>
> Daniel
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
> > > >>>> struberg@yahoo.
> de> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Hi Daniel
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Going though the list, I see the following
> validations as ideal
> > > >>>> candidates
> > > >>>>> for me:-)
> > > >>>>> 39: Validation:
> > > >>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement
> mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> > > >>>>> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> > > >>>>>
> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into
> the details?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Ralf
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> > > >>>>>
> Von: struberg@yahoo.de
> > > >>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> > > >>>>> An: <st...@yahoo.de>, <ralf.
> > > >>>>>
> struberg@yahoo.de>
> > > >>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Hello, Ralf!
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> > > >>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Starting
> small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> > > >> large
> > > >>>>> that can
> > > >>>>> still be pretty big,
> but hopefully we can find you something that
> > > >>> fits.
> > > >>>>> One area I think is always a good place for
> > >
> >>>>> new help is the validation code:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> There's always something to do
> there. Most of that code lives
> > > >>>>> here:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> -
> > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> -
> > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> That's probably not enough
> information to completely get started,
> > > >>> but
> > > >>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> > > >>>>>
> those validations look interesting to you?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> -David
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Mar
> 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> Hi
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I recently
> subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> > > >>> help and
> > > >>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> >
> > >>>>> part.
> > > >>>>>> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> > > >>>>>> I am also contributing
> from time to time to the
> > > >>>>> Shrinkwrap
> > > >>>>>> Descriptor project.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I was looking at the
> OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> > > >>> maybe
> > > >>>>> candidates?
> > > >>>>> As you wrote for
> > > >>>>>>
> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> > > >>> know.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Cheers,
> > > >>>>>>
> Ralf
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Karan Singh Malhi
> twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
>
>
>
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
AW: Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by "ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch" <ra...@bluewin.ch>.
Hi Karan
Thanks for this. Cool:-) I just opened this link.
I am not sure about the confluence username and password
as mentioned in the documentation. Do I need to register my self somewhere?
I was a few weeks ago ready to submit a
patch but I was not sure how to do this...
Typical beginner problems. And I was busy since then with my company work.
Regards,
Ralf
----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
Von: karan.malhi@gmail.com
Datum: 10.05.2013 17:37
An: <dev@tomee.apache.
org>
Betreff: Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Ralf,
Nice to see you are working on the validation.
FYI, Once you ran the th
validation tests, it would generate a report and post it on confluence, i
think that part is
now a bit broken as the generated page is not rendered
properly. Here is the page which gets generated:
https://cwiki.apache.org/OPENEJB/validation-keys-audit-report.html . This
page should tell you which validation keys
are not currently being tested
and also the list of keys which have been tested with links to test cases
which have
coverage for those keys.
The link provided in the following section of
http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html is broken.
"The above command will create a complete test
coverage report and post it
to this location OPENEJB:Validation Keys Audit
Report<openejb:validation-keys-audit-report.
html>
"
PS: David is being very kind here, he wrote the validation framework and
basic infrastructure to test it, I
simply wrote a Testing framework around
it and in that process asked him tons of questions and bounced ideas in the
list. The dev team was very helpful in driving this framework.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Vishwanath
Krishnamurthi <
tovishwanath@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> If you hadn't already seen this- here's a good doc
> http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html
>
> -Vishwa
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, David
Blevins <david.blevins@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of
that.
> > He did an amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations
> and
> > ensuring each message key
is used properly and supports all three levels
> we
> > expect.
> >
> > I agree, it's some of the better code I've
seen.
> >
> >
> > -David
> >
> > On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> >
> > > Hi David and
all contributors. I stepped into the section of the
> > validation implementation, tests and related source code. I
never have
> seen
> > such a clear design. It is good understandible.
> > >
> > > I am impressed:-)
> > >
> > > Tx,
Ralf
> > >
> > >
> > > On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well
on IRC,
> somebody
> > > tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to
> > the
> > > ML
rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
> > > safety ropes in regards to making sure
everything is documented and
> thus
> > > transparent :)
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Daniel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> but just to be clear:
IRC is a really good way to quickly get
> feedback.
> > >> But all the important decision making process and
communication needs
> > to be
> > >> on the ASF mailing lists.
> > >> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't
happen on the mailing
> > >> list, it didn't happen" :)
> > >>
> > >> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of
a few good legal
> > reasons)
> > >> and the information is only available to a very few people who were
> > logged
> >
>> in to the IRC.
> > >>
> > >> LieGrue,
> > >> strub
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
>
> >>> From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
> > >>> To: struberg@yahoo.de
> > >>> Cc:
> > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:
05 AM
> > >>> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi Ralf,
> > >>>
> > >>> we are
as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
> > >> over
> > >>> email...
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers
> >
>>> Daniel
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi
Daniel
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I can
see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are
> good
> > >>>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the
one, I am considering to
> > >> work on,
> > >>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as
>
> >> they
> > >>>> arise.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Tx, Ralf
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh
wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Ralf,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that
you
> probably
> > >> meant
> > >>>> David instead of Daniel ;)
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'd say if you like take
both if they are available. That's really
> > >>> up to
> > >>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort
out things.
> Don't
> > >>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Cheers
> > >>>>
Daniel
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
> > >>>> struberg@yahoo.
de> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi Daniel
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Going though the list, I see the following
validations as ideal
> > >>>> candidates
> > >>>>> for me:-)
> > >>>>> 39: Validation:
> > >>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement
mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> > >>>>> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> > >>>>>
@EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into
the details?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ralf
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> > >>>>>
Von: struberg@yahoo.de
> > >>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> > >>>>> An: <st...@yahoo.de>, <ralf.
> > >>>>>
struberg@yahoo.de>
> > >>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Hello, Ralf!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> > >>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Starting
small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> > >> large
> > >>>>> that can
> > >>>>> still be pretty big,
but hopefully we can find you something that
> > >>> fits.
> > >>>>> One area I think is always a good place for
> >
>>>>> new help is the validation code:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> There's always something to do
there. Most of that code lives
> > >>>>> here:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -
> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -
> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> That's probably not enough
information to completely get started,
> > >>> but
> > >>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> > >>>>>
those validations look interesting to you?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -David
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Mar
17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> Hi
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I recently
subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> > >>> help and
> > >>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
>
> >>>>> part.
> > >>>>>> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> > >>>>>> I am also contributing
from time to time to the
> > >>>>> Shrinkwrap
> > >>>>>> Descriptor project.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I was looking at the
OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> > >>> maybe
> > >>>>> candidates?
> > >>>>> As you wrote for
> > >>>>>>
beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> > >>> know.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>
Ralf
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
>
> >
> >
> >
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
Ralf,
Nice to see you are working on the validation. FYI, Once you ran the
validation tests, it would generate a report and post it on confluence, i
think that part is now a bit broken as the generated page is not rendered
properly. Here is the page which gets generated:
https://cwiki.apache.org/OPENEJB/validation-keys-audit-report.html . This
page should tell you which validation keys are not currently being tested
and also the list of keys which have been tested with links to test cases
which have coverage for those keys.
The link provided in the following section of
http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html is broken.
"The above command will create a complete test coverage report and post it
to this location OPENEJB:Validation Keys Audit
Report<openejb:validation-keys-audit-report.html>
"
PS: David is being very kind here, he wrote the validation framework and
basic infrastructure to test it, I simply wrote a Testing framework around
it and in that process asked him tons of questions and bounced ideas in the
list. The dev team was very helpful in driving this framework.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Vishwanath Krishnamurthi <
tovishwanath@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> If you hadn't already seen this- here's a good doc
> http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html
>
> -Vishwa
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, David Blevins <david.blevins@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of that.
> > He did an amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations
> and
> > ensuring each message key is used properly and supports all three levels
> we
> > expect.
> >
> > I agree, it's some of the better code I've seen.
> >
> >
> > -David
> >
> > On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> >
> > > Hi David and all contributors. I stepped into the section of the
> > validation implementation, tests and related source code. I never have
> seen
> > such a clear design. It is good understandible.
> > >
> > > I am impressed:-)
> > >
> > > Tx, Ralf
> > >
> > >
> > > On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC,
> somebody
> > > tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to
> > the
> > > ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
> > > safety ropes in regards to making sure everything is documented and
> thus
> > > transparent :)
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Daniel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get
> feedback.
> > >> But all the important decision making process and communication needs
> > to be
> > >> on the ASF mailing lists.
> > >> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing
> > >> list, it didn't happen" :)
> > >>
> > >> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal
> > reasons)
> > >> and the information is only available to a very few people who were
> > logged
> > >> in to the IRC.
> > >>
> > >> LieGrue,
> > >> strub
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>> From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
> > >>> To: struberg@yahoo.de
> > >>> Cc:
> > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
> > >>> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi Ralf,
> > >>>
> > >>> we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
> > >> over
> > >>> email...
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers
> > >>> Daniel
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi Daniel
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are
> good
> > >>>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to
> > >> work on,
> > >>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as
> > >> they
> > >>>> arise.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Tx, Ralf
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Ralf,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you
> probably
> > >> meant
> > >>>> David instead of Daniel ;)
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really
> > >>> up to
> > >>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things.
> Don't
> > >>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Cheers
> > >>>> Daniel
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
> > >>>> struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi Daniel
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
> > >>>> candidates
> > >>>>> for me:-)
> > >>>>> 39: Validation:
> > >>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> > >>>>> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> > >>>>> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ralf
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> > >>>>> Von: struberg@yahoo.de
> > >>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> > >>>>> An: <st...@yahoo.de>, <ralf.
> > >>>>> struberg@yahoo.de>
> > >>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Hello, Ralf!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> > >>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> > >> large
> > >>>>> that can
> > >>>>> still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that
> > >>> fits.
> > >>>>> One area I think is always a good place for
> > >>>>> new help is the validation code:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> > >>>>> here:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -
> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -
> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> That's probably not enough information to completely get started,
> > >>> but
> > >>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> > >>>>> those validations look interesting to you?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -David
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> Hi
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> > >>> help and
> > >>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> > >>>>> part.
> > >>>>>> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> > >>>>>> I am also contributing from time to time to the
> > >>>>> Shrinkwrap
> > >>>>>> Descriptor project.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> > >>> maybe
> > >>>>> candidates?
> > >>>>> As you wrote for
> > >>>>>> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> > >>> know.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>> Ralf
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
AW: Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by "ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch" <ra...@bluewin.ch>.
Hi Vishwa
Thank you very much for the link. I didn't have seen this so far. This info helps!
-Ralf
----Ursprüngliche
Nachricht----
Von: tovishwanath@gmail.com
Datum: 22.03.2013 19:30
An: <de...@tomee.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Good
validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Hi Ralf,
If you hadn't already seen this- here's a good doc
http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html
-Vishwa
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, David Blevins
<da...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of that.
> He did an
amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations and
> ensuring each message key is used properly and
supports all three levels we
> expect.
>
> I agree, it's some of the better code I've seen.
>
>
> -David
>
> On Mar 21,
2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
>
> > Hi David and all contributors. I stepped into the section of
the
> validation implementation, tests and related source code. I never have seen
> such a clear design. It is good
understandible.
> >
> > I am impressed:-)
> >
> > Tx, Ralf
> >
> >
> > On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for
the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC, somebody
> > tells you immediately that design change stuff etc.
should be posted to
> the
> > ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
> > safety ropes in
regards to making sure everything is documented and thus
> > transparent :)
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> >
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> but just to be clear: IRC is
a really good way to quickly get feedback.
> >> But all the important decision making process and communication needs
>
to be
> >> on the ASF mailing lists.
> >> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing
> >>
list, it didn't happen" :)
> >>
> >> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal
> reasons)
> >>
and the information is only available to a very few people who were
> logged
> >> in to the IRC.
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
>
>> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
> >>> To:
struberg@yahoo.de
> >>> Cc:
> >>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
> >>> Subject: Re: IGood validation
candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> >>>
> >>> Hi Ralf,
> >>>
> >>> we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you
prefer IRC
> >> over
> >>> email...
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Daniel
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM,
<st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Daniel
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that
you replied.
> >>>>
> >>>> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
> >>>> starting points
for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to
> >> work on,
> >>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask
you experts as soon as
> >> they
> >>>> arise.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tx, Ralf
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 20.03.13 20:
32 dsh wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Ralf,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you
probably
> >> meant
> >>>> David instead of Daniel ;)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd say if you like take both if they are
available. That's really
> >>> up to
> >>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
>
>>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>> Daniel
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
> >>>> struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi
Daniel
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
> >>>> candidates
> >>>>> for me:
-)
> >>>>> 39: Validation:
> >>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> >>>>> 48: Validation:
Field annotated with more than one injection;
> >>>>> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> >>>>>
>
>>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ralf
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----
Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> >>>>> Von: struberg@yahoo.de
> >>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> >>>>> An: <struberg@yahoo.
de>, <ralf.
> >>>>> struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello, Ralf!
> >>>>>
>
>>>>> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> >>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Starting
small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> >> large
> >>>>> that can
> >>>>> still be pretty big, but
hopefully we can find you something that
> >>> fits.
> >>>>> One area I think is always a good place for
> >>>>> new
help is the validation code:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There's always something to do there. Most
of that code lives
> >>>>> here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's probably not enough
information to completely get started,
> >>> but
> >>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> >>>>> those
validations look interesting to you?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28
AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I recently subscribed myself to the dev
list. I would love to
> >>> help and
> >>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> >>>>> part.
> >>>>>> I work as a
Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> >>>>>> I am also contributing from time to time to the
> >>>>>
Shrinkwrap
> >>>>>> Descriptor project.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask
JIRAs
> >>> maybe
> >>>>> candidates?
> >>>>> As you wrote for
> >>>>>> beginners, start small:-) If you have something
to do, let me
> >>> know.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> Ralf
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by Vishwanath Krishnamurthi <to...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ralf,
If you hadn't already seen this- here's a good doc
http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html
-Vishwa
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of that.
> He did an amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations and
> ensuring each message key is used properly and supports all three levels we
> expect.
>
> I agree, it's some of the better code I've seen.
>
>
> -David
>
> On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
>
> > Hi David and all contributors. I stepped into the section of the
> validation implementation, tests and related source code. I never have seen
> such a clear design. It is good understandible.
> >
> > I am impressed:-)
> >
> > Tx, Ralf
> >
> >
> > On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC, somebody
> > tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to
> the
> > ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
> > safety ropes in regards to making sure everything is documented and thus
> > transparent :)
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get feedback.
> >> But all the important decision making process and communication needs
> to be
> >> on the ASF mailing lists.
> >> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing
> >> list, it didn't happen" :)
> >>
> >> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal
> reasons)
> >> and the information is only available to a very few people who were
> logged
> >> in to the IRC.
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
> >>> To: struberg@yahoo.de
> >>> Cc:
> >>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
> >>> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> >>>
> >>> Hi Ralf,
> >>>
> >>> we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
> >> over
> >>> email...
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Daniel
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Daniel
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
> >>>>
> >>>> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
> >>>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to
> >> work on,
> >>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as
> >> they
> >>>> arise.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tx, Ralf
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Ralf,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably
> >> meant
> >>>> David instead of Daniel ;)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really
> >>> up to
> >>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
> >>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>> Daniel
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
> >>>> struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Daniel
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
> >>>> candidates
> >>>>> for me:-)
> >>>>> 39: Validation:
> >>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> >>>>> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> >>>>> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ralf
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> >>>>> Von: struberg@yahoo.de
> >>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> >>>>> An: <st...@yahoo.de>, <ralf.
> >>>>> struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello, Ralf!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> >>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> >> large
> >>>>> that can
> >>>>> still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that
> >>> fits.
> >>>>> One area I think is always a good place for
> >>>>> new help is the validation code:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> >>>>> here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's probably not enough information to completely get started,
> >>> but
> >>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> >>>>> those validations look interesting to you?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> >>> help and
> >>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> >>>>> part.
> >>>>>> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> >>>>>> I am also contributing from time to time to the
> >>>>> Shrinkwrap
> >>>>>> Descriptor project.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> >>> maybe
> >>>>> candidates?
> >>>>> As you wrote for
> >>>>>> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> >>> know.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> Ralf
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of that. He did an amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations and ensuring each message key is used properly and supports all three levels we expect.
I agree, it's some of the better code I've seen.
-David
On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> Hi David and all contributors. I stepped into the section of the validation implementation, tests and related source code. I never have seen such a clear design. It is good understandible.
>
> I am impressed:-)
>
> Tx, Ralf
>
>
> On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
>
> Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC, somebody
> tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to the
> ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
> safety ropes in regards to making sure everything is documented and thus
> transparent :)
>
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>
>> but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get feedback.
>> But all the important decision making process and communication needs to be
>> on the ASF mailing lists.
>> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing
>> list, it didn't happen" :)
>>
>> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal reasons)
>> and the information is only available to a very few people who were logged
>> in to the IRC.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
>>> To: struberg@yahoo.de
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
>>> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
>>>
>>> Hi Ralf,
>>>
>>> we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
>> over
>>> email...
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Daniel
>>>>
>>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
>>>>
>>>> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
>>>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to
>> work on,
>>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as
>> they
>>>> arise.
>>>>
>>>> Tx, Ralf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ralf,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably
>> meant
>>>> David instead of Daniel ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really
>>> up to
>>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
>>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
>>>> struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Daniel
>>>>>
>>>>> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
>>>> candidates
>>>>> for me:-)
>>>>> 39: Validation:
>>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
>>>>> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
>>>>> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
>>>>>
>>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
>>>>> Von: struberg@yahoo.de
>>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
>>>>> An: <st...@yahoo.de>, <ralf.
>>>>> struberg@yahoo.de>
>>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello, Ralf!
>>>>>
>>>>> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
>>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this
>> large
>>>>> that can
>>>>> still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that
>>> fits.
>>>>> One area I think is always a good place for
>>>>> new help is the validation code:
>>>>>
>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>>>>>
>>>>> There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
>>>>> here:
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's probably not enough information to completely get started,
>>> but
>>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
>>>>> those validations look interesting to you?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
>>> help and
>>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
>>>>> part.
>>>>>> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
>>>>>> I am also contributing from time to time to the
>>>>> Shrinkwrap
>>>>>> Descriptor project.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
>>> maybe
>>>>> candidates?
>>>>> As you wrote for
>>>>>> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
>>> know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ralf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by ra...@bluewin.ch.
Hi David and all contributors. I stepped into the section of the validation implementation, tests and related source code. I never have seen such a clear design. It is good understandible.
I am impressed:-)
Tx, Ralf
On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote:
Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC, somebody
tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to the
ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
safety ropes in regards to making sure everything is documented and thus
transparent :)
Cheers
Daniel
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get feedback.
> But all the important decision making process and communication needs to be
> on the ASF mailing lists.
> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing
> list, it didn't happen" :)
>
> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal reasons)
> and the information is only available to a very few people who were logged
> in to the IRC.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: dsh <st...@yahoo.de>
> > To: struberg@yahoo.de
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
> > Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> >
> > Hi Ralf,
> >
> > we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
> over
> > email...
> >
> > Cheers
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Daniel
> >>
> >> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
> >>
> >> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
> >> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to
> work on,
> >> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as
> they
> >> arise.
> >>
> >> Tx, Ralf
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Ralf,
> >>
> >>
> >> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably
> meant
> >> David instead of Daniel ;)
> >>
> >>
> >> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really
> > up to
> >> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
> >> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, struberg@yahoo.de <
> >> struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi Daniel
> >> >
> >> > Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
> >> candidates
> >> > for me:-)
> >> > 39: Validation:
> >> > @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> >> > 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> >> > @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> >> >
> >> > Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
> >> >
> >> > Ralf
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> >> > Von: struberg@yahoo.de
> >> > Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> >> > An: <st...@yahoo.de>, <ralf.
> >> > struberg@yahoo.de>
> >> > Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> >> >
> >> > Hello, Ralf!
> >> >
> >> > Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> >> > especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> >> >
> >> > Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> large
> >> > that can
> >> > still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that
> > fits.
> >> > One area I think is always a good place for
> >> > new help is the validation code:
> >> >
> >> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >> >
> >> > There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> >> > here:
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That's probably not enough information to completely get started,
> > but
> >> > hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> >> > those validations look interesting to you?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -David
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, struberg@yahoo.de wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > Hi
> >> > >
> >> > > I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> > help and
> >> > contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> >> > part.
> >> > > I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> >> > > I am also contributing from time to time to the
> >> > Shrinkwrap
> >> > > Descriptor project.
> >> > >
> >> > > I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> > maybe
> >> > candidates?
> >> > As you wrote for
> >> > > beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> > know.
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers,
> >> > > Ralf
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by dsh <da...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC, somebody
tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to the
ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two
safety ropes in regards to making sure everything is documented and thus
transparent :)
Cheers
Daniel
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get feedback.
> But all the important decision making process and communication needs to be
> on the ASF mailing lists.
> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing
> list, it didn't happen" :)
>
> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal reasons)
> and the information is only available to a very few people who were logged
> in to the IRC.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: dsh <da...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@tomee.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
> > Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
> >
> > Hi Ralf,
> >
> > we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC
> over
> > email...
> >
> > Cheers
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <ra...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Daniel
> >>
> >> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
> >>
> >> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
> >> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to
> work on,
> >> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as
> they
> >> arise.
> >>
> >> Tx, Ralf
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Ralf,
> >>
> >>
> >> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably
> meant
> >> David instead of Daniel ;)
> >>
> >>
> >> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really
> > up to
> >> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
> >> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch <
> >> ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi Daniel
> >> >
> >> > Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
> >> candidates
> >> > for me:-)
> >> > 39: Validation:
> >> > @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> >> > 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> >> > @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> >> >
> >> > Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
> >> >
> >> > Ralf
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> >> > Von: ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch
> >> > Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> >> > An: <ra...@bluewin.ch>, <ralf.
> >> > ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch>
> >> > Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> >> >
> >> > Hello, Ralf!
> >> >
> >> > Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> >> > especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> >> >
> >> > Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this
> large
> >> > that can
> >> > still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that
> > fits.
> >> > One area I think is always a good place for
> >> > new help is the validation code:
> >> >
> >> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >> >
> >> > There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> >> > here:
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That's probably not enough information to completely get started,
> > but
> >> > hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> >> > those validations look interesting to you?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -David
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > Hi
> >> > >
> >> > > I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> > help and
> >> > contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> >> > part.
> >> > > I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> >> > > I am also contributing from time to time to the
> >> > Shrinkwrap
> >> > > Descriptor project.
> >> > >
> >> > > I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> > maybe
> >> > candidates?
> >> > As you wrote for
> >> > > beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> > know.
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers,
> >> > > Ralf
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get feedback. But all the important decision making process and communication needs to be on the ASF mailing lists.
There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing list, it didn't happen" :)
The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal reasons) and the information is only available to a very few people who were logged in to the IRC.
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: dsh <da...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@tomee.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:05 AM
> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
>
> Hi Ralf,
>
> we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC over
> email...
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <ra...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
>
>> Hi Daniel
>>
>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
>>
>> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to work on,
>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as they
>> arise.
>>
>> Tx, Ralf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ralf,
>>
>>
>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably meant
>> David instead of Daniel ;)
>>
>>
>> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really
> up to
>> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch <
>> ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Hi Daniel
>> >
>> > Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
>> candidates
>> > for me:-)
>> > 39: Validation:
>> > @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
>> > 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
>> > @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
>> >
>> > Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
>> >
>> > Ralf
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
>> > Von: ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch
>> > Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
>> > An: <ra...@bluewin.ch>, <ralf.
>> > ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch>
>> > Betreff: Re: Hello all together
>> >
>> > Hello, Ralf!
>> >
>> > Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
>> > especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
>> >
>> > Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large
>> > that can
>> > still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that
> fits.
>> > One area I think is always a good place for
>> > new help is the validation code:
>> >
>> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>> >
>> > There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
>> > here:
>> >
>> > -
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>> >
>> > -
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>> >
>> >
>> > That's probably not enough information to completely get started,
> but
>> > hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
>> > those validations look interesting to you?
>> >
>> >
>> > -David
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > Hi
>> > >
>> > > I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to
> help and
>> > contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
>> > part.
>> > > I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
>> > > I am also contributing from time to time to the
>> > Shrinkwrap
>> > > Descriptor project.
>> > >
>> > > I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs
> maybe
>> > candidates?
>> > As you wrote for
>> > > beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me
> know.
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Ralf
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by dsh <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ralf,
we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC over
email...
Cheers
Daniel
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <ra...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> Hi Daniel
>
> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
>
> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good
> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to work on,
> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as they
> arise.
>
> Tx, Ralf
>
>
>
>
> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
>
> Hi Ralf,
>
>
> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably meant
> David instead of Daniel ;)
>
>
> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really up to
> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
>
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch <
> ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch> wrote:
>
>
> > Hi Daniel
> >
> > Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal
> candidates
> > for me:-)
> > 39: Validation:
> > @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> > 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> > @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
> >
> > Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
> >
> > Ralf
> >
> >
> >
> > ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> > Von: ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch
> > Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> > An: <ra...@bluewin.ch>, <ralf.
> > ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch>
> > Betreff: Re: Hello all together
> >
> > Hello, Ralf!
> >
> > Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> > especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
> >
> > Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large
> > that can
> > still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that fits.
> > One area I think is always a good place for
> > new help is the validation code:
> >
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >
> > There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> > here:
> >
> > -
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >
> > -
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
> >
> >
> > That's probably not enough information to completely get started, but
> > hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> > those validations look interesting to you?
> >
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> > On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> >
> > >
> > Hi
> > >
> > > I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and
> > contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> > part.
> > > I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> > > I am also contributing from time to time to the
> > Shrinkwrap
> > > Descriptor project.
> > >
> > > I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe
> > candidates?
> > As you wrote for
> > > beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Ralf
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by ra...@bluewin.ch.
Hi Daniel
Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied.
I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are good starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to work on, after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as they arise.
Tx, Ralf
On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote:
Hi Ralf,
thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably meant
David instead of Daniel ;)
I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really up to
your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
Cheers
Daniel
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch <
ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> Hi Daniel
>
> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal candidates
> for me:-)
> 39: Validation:
> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
>
> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
>
> Ralf
>
>
>
> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> Von: ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch
> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> An: <ra...@bluewin.ch>, <ralf.
> ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch>
> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
>
> Hello, Ralf!
>
> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
>
> Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large
> that can
> still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that fits.
> One area I think is always a good place for
> new help is the validation code:
>
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>
> There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> here:
>
> -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>
> -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>
>
> That's probably not enough information to completely get started, but
> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> those validations look interesting to you?
>
>
> -David
>
>
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
>
> >
> Hi
> >
> > I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and
> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> part.
> > I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> > I am also contributing from time to time to the
> Shrinkwrap
> > Descriptor project.
> >
> > I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe
> candidates?
> As you wrote for
> > beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ralf
>
>
>
>
>
Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by dsh <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ralf,
thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you probably meant
David instead of Daniel ;)
I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really up to
your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. Don't
forget to ask questions as soon as they arise!
Cheers
Daniel
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch <
ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> Hi Daniel
>
> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal candidates
> for me:-)
> 39: Validation:
> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
>
> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
>
> Ralf
>
>
>
> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> Von: david.blevins@gmail.com
> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
> An: <de...@tomee.apache.org>, <ralf.
> battenfeld@bluewin.ch>
> Betreff: Re: Hello all together
>
> Hello, Ralf!
>
> Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
> especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
>
> Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large
> that can
> still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that fits.
> One area I think is always a good place for
> new help is the validation code:
>
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
>
> There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
> here:
>
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/
>
> -
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/
>
>
> That's probably not enough information to completely get started, but
> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
> those validations look interesting to you?
>
>
> -David
>
>
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
>
> >
> Hi
> >
> > I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and
> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
> part.
> > I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> > I am also contributing from time to time to the
> Shrinkwrap
> > Descriptor project.
> >
> > I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe
> candidates?
> As you wrote for
> > beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ralf
>
>
>
>
>
IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48
Posted by "ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch" <ra...@bluewin.ch>.
Hi Daniel
Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal candidates for me:-)
39: Validation:
@ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton
48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection;
@EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit
Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details?
Ralf
----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
Von: david.blevins@gmail.com
Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42
An: <de...@tomee.apache.org>, <ralf.
battenfeld@bluewin.ch>
Betreff: Re: Hello all together
Hello, Ralf!
Welcome aboard. We love having new people,
especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large that can
still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that fits. One area I think is always a good place for
new help is the validation code:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives
here:
- http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/
- http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/
That's probably not enough information to completely get started, but hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of
those validations look interesting to you?
-David
On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
>
Hi
>
> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and contribute, especially for the OpenEJB
part.
> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> I am also contributing from time to time to the
Shrinkwrap
> Descriptor project.
>
> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe candidates?
As you wrote for
> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralf
Re: Hello all together
Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
Hello, Ralf!
Welcome aboard. We love having new people, especially ones that love OpenEJB :)
Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this large that can still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that fits. One area I think is always a good place for new help is the validation code:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453
There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives here:
- http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/
- http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/config/rules/
That's probably not enough information to completely get started, but hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of those validations look interesting to you?
-David
On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, ralf.battenfeld@bluewin.ch wrote:
> Hi
>
> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to help and contribute, especially for the OpenEJB part.
> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-)
> I am also contributing from time to time to the Shrinkwrap
> Descriptor project.
>
> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs maybe candidates? As you wrote for
> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me know.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralf