Got your changes. They matched mine. - Jim
-----Original Message----- From: Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:28:39 To: <dev@activemq.apache.org> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache.NMS.ActiveMQ 1.2.0 #3 On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 14:20 -0800, Jim Gomes wrote: > I searched the code for other areas where Thread.ResetAbort() was called > (three locations found), and I have made some changes on my local machine. > I am reconfiguring my application to use these custom versions so I can test > the changes. I'll report back after I have been able to verify the fix. > > I see that you reopened AMQNET-218. I'll go add my comments there so we can > track the issue. I made a few small changes in the code, make sure you grab the latest. > > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 13:41 -0800, Jim Gomes wrote: > > > -1 > > > > > > The recent change made for AMQNET-218 seems to have introduced a problem. > > > In general, I am uneasy about having this type of threading-related code > > > change made right before a release. It would be better to let this kind > > of > > > change "cook" for a while. > > > > > > Specifically, in CompositeTaskRunner.cs, line 160, the call to > > > Thread.ResetAbort() in the exception handler is causing an exception, > > > because this function should only be called in response to a > > > ThreadAbortException. It is causing a ThreadStateException because no > > abort > > > was requested. This catch handler should be re-written so that the > > > Thread.ResetAbort() call is made in a specific exception handler for > > > ThreadAbortException, rather than in the general exception handler. > > > > > > > Ok, then lets consider the vote canceled and until such time as someone > > can come up with a solution that makes everyone happy we will put 1.2.0 > > on hold. > > > > Regards > > Tim. > > > >
