TOMEE-2960 Add github actions for tomee-7.1.x branch
Hi, I created TOMEE-2960 [1] to explain the why and track the addition of GitHub actions for tomee-7.1.x branch. The current PR is ready for review and the scope covers: Compile without tests, pmd, and checkstyle. Once this is reviewed and merged I'll follow up with some issues I'm seeing locally when executing the `rat:check -Prat" profile to then jump into the full tests to run. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2960 -- Atentamente: César Hernández.
Looking for infor on htp405
Hello. Running tome 7.0.6 I'm looking for info to get around the http 405 error while attempting to submit a post request. So far I have added the following to my web.xml with no success. default org.apache.catalina.servlets.DefaultServlet debug 0 listings false readonly false 1 Would anyone have any other hints on how to get around this restriction? Thank you. Daniel Echegoyen
Re: TOMEE-2958 TOMEE-2959 Tomcat and jackson update
Its a dependency bought in by ActiveMQ. I'm happy to look at what it'll take to use Johnzon, but if memory serves me correctly, last time I looked, it wasn't trivial. I agree that we should work towards that goal though. Jon On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:33 PM Alex The Rocker wrote: > Hello, > > Why is Jackson embedded in TomEE, while we have Johnzon providing both > JSON-P & JSON-B ? > Isn't it making TomEE fatter than needed, not mentioning double > maintenance/updating efforts ? > > Kind regards, > Alexandre > > Le lun. 18 janv. 2021 à 22:55, Cesar Hernandez a > écrit : > > > > Hi all, > > > > I created the following JIRAS and also a PR is now available for review: > > > > Update to Tomcat 8.5.61 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2958 > > > > Update to jackson 2.12.0 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2959 > > > > PR: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/728 > > -- > > Atentamente: > > César Hernández. >
TOMEE-2958 TOMEE-2959 Tomcat and jackson update
Hi all, I created the following JIRAS and also a PR is now available for review: Update to Tomcat 8.5.61 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2958 Update to jackson 2.12.0 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2959 PR: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/728 -- Atentamente: César Hernández.
Re: TOMEE-2927: Translate to Portuguese: examples/serverless-tomee-microprofile
Hello Cesar, thanks : ) Em seg., 18 de jan. de 2021 às 14:38, Cesar Hernandez escreveu: > Hi Daniel, > I just review the structure, +1, Thanks much. > > Any Portuguese speaker is welcome to do the copy edit :). > > El lun, 18 ene 2021 a las 11:09, Daniel Dias Dos Santos (< > daniel.dias.analist...@gmail.com>) escribió: > > > Hello, > > > > I opened a ticket in Jira [1] and a PR [2], can anyone revise > > the translation? > > > > thank you > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2927 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/751 > > > > > -- > Atentamente: > César Hernández. >
[GitHub] [tomee] rzo1 commented on pull request #750: TOMEE-2957 - Fix OWASP Checks on ASF Jenkins Environment
rzo1 commented on pull request #750: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/750#issuecomment-762399478 @cesarhernandezgt Thanks for merging. I updated the CI configuration on jenkins to conduct a full check if triggered. The job fails atm due to some suspected CVEs - need to take a closer look if these are actual false positives (and need to be excluded). This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: TOMEE-2927: Translate to Portuguese: examples/serverless-tomee-microprofile
Hi Daniel, I just review the structure, +1, Thanks much. Any Portuguese speaker is welcome to do the copy edit :). El lun, 18 ene 2021 a las 11:09, Daniel Dias Dos Santos (< daniel.dias.analist...@gmail.com>) escribió: > Hello, > > I opened a ticket in Jira [1] and a PR [2], can anyone revise > the translation? > > thank you > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2927 > [2] https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/751 > -- Atentamente: César Hernández.
TOMEE-2927: Translate to Portuguese: examples/serverless-tomee-microprofile
Hello, I opened a ticket in Jira [1] and a PR [2], can anyone revise the translation? thank you [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2927 [2] https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/751
[GitHub] [tomee] cesarhernandezgt merged pull request #750: TOMEE-2957 - Fix OWASP Checks on ASF Jenkins Environment
cesarhernandezgt merged pull request #750: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/750 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] cesarhernandezgt commented on pull request #750: TOMEE-2957 - Fix OWASP Checks on ASF Jenkins Environment
cesarhernandezgt commented on pull request #750: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/750#issuecomment-762370974 @rzo1 Thanks for the example of the timing, I think also the `-Pmain,owasp-report` is good to know for local executions. @jeanouii Base on Richard's feedback in the ticket, it seems he still doesn't have access to the Merge button due to missing write permissions. I'm going to merge now. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] Daniel-Dos opened a new pull request #751: TOMEE-2927 Translate to Portuguese: examples/serverless-tomee-mp
Daniel-Dos opened a new pull request #751: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/751 Translate to Portuguese the example serverless-tomee-microprofile link to Jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2927 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] rzo1 commented on pull request #750: TOMEE-2957 - Fix OWASP Checks on ASF Jenkins Environment
rzo1 commented on pull request #750: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/750#issuecomment-762351731 Just ran a full report via on my machine (8c, 32gb ram, ssd): ``` mvn -U --show-version --fail-at-end clean install -Pmain,owasp-report -DskipTests ``` It took: ``` [INFO] [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS [INFO] [INFO] Total time: 17:37 min [INFO] Finished at: 2021-01-18T17:23:02+01:00 [INFO] ``` without OWASP updates. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] rzo1 commented on pull request #750: TOMEE-2957 - Fix OWASP Checks on ASF Jenkins Environment
rzo1 commented on pull request #750: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/750#issuecomment-762347852 To answer your question, I started a run on my local machine. Will post an update soon. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [tomee] rzo1 commented on pull request #750: TOMEE-2957 - Fix OWASP Checks on ASF Jenkins Environment
rzo1 commented on pull request #750: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/750#issuecomment-762331778 Hi @cesarhernandezgt The PR job does not run owasp as it is defined in a separate profile. General problems related to timeouts for OWASP plugin: - OWASP plugin requires a CVE database, which is downloaded and cached on the machine via Maven - If no central database is configured, it will download (initial or to update) the CVE database from OWASP. If the exeucting machine has limited bandwidth or the OWASP mirror is slow / down, the update process will time out. This update process can take some minutes: ``` [INFO] Checking for updates [INFO] NVD CVE requires several updates; this could take a couple of minutes. [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2003 [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2002 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2003 (1316 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2004 [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2003 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2002 (1659 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2005 [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2002 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2004 (1509 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2006 [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2004 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2005 (1721 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2007 [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2005 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2006 (1835 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2008 [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2006 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2007 (1825 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2007 [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2009 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2008 (1800 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2008 [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2010 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2009 (1841 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2011 [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2009 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2010 (1801 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2012 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2011 (1675 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2013 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2012 (1852 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2014 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2013 (1842 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2015 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2014 (1820 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2016 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2015 (1832 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2017 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2016 (1805 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2018 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2003 (12802 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2010 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2017 (1855 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2019 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2018 (1989 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2020 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2019 (1994 ms) [INFO] Download Started for NVD CVE - 2021 [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2021 (1010 ms) [INFO] Download Complete for NVD CVE - 2020 (2131 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2004 (25181 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2011 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2005 (49059 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2012 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2002 (50881 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2013 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2009 (61418 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2014 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2007 (74519 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2015 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2010 (70112 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2016 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2006 (85494 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2017 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2008 (91107 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2018 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2011 (73078 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2019 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2012 (82196 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2021 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2021 (1427 ms) [INFO] Processing Started for NVD CVE - 2020 [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2013 (85502 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2015 (72849 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2014 (85486 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2016 (74144 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2017 (79997 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2019 (71406 ms) [INFO] Processing Complete for NVD CVE - 2018 (75791 ms) [INFO]
Re: [TCK] EJB 3.2 timers
thanks for sharing the awesome news! El lun, 18 ene 2021 a las 7:51, Jean-Louis Monteiro (< jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>) escribió: > https://tck.work/tomee/build?id=1610964398253 > > 100% green on EJB32 !!! > -- > Jean-Louis Monteiro > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 4:18 PM Jonathan Gallimore < > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Fantastic - thank you! > > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:11 PM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > > > Went ahead and merged this PR and marked the jira as being resolved. > I'm > > > waiting for the build to finish and I'll fire a new TCK run over the > > > weekend maybe so we can validate if it fixed or not the issue. > > > -- > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:52 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Here is the PR https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/749 > > > > > > > > I'm building locally and I'll run the EJB32 related tests locally > first > > > > -- > > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:45 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi community, > > > >> > > > >> Finally got some time to think about this and fix it (I think ;-) ) > > > >> > > > >> There is one scenario where it is relevant. > > > >> Let's imagine you restart an application, the timer may have expired > > > >> because the end is already in the past, but we don't want to have to > > > change > > > >> the binary in order to set a valid end date to restart a server. > > > >> > > > >> In that case, we are expecting the server to successfully start, but > > the > > > >> timer to never trigger. > > > >> > > > >> I'll create a PR so you can double check before I merge it. > > > >> -- > > > >> Jean-Louis Monteiro > > > >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > > >> http://www.tomitribe.com > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 9:08 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > > >> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Thanks Richard for the quick feedback. > > > >>> > > > >>> I am totally with you. Can't think of a valid reason to do that or > > even > > > >>> think it should be a tested requirement in TCK. > > > >>> If using endTime before startTime is the only way to specify a > timer > > > >>> never expires, something is wrong to me. > > > >>> > > > >>> I'll go ahead and see if I can adjust and at the same time raise an > > > >>> issue on the TCK/EE side. > > > >>> > > > >>> -- > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 9:03 AM Zowalla, Richard < > > > >>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > > >>> > > > Hi, > > > > > > I think it is a bit odd in this tck test case, that the creation > of > > a > > > timer with an end time before the start time should even be > > possible, > > > but nevermind :) > > > > > > I do not quite understand the reason why this behaviour was chosen > > in > > > the first place. I might miss something as I am not long enough in > > the > > > EE world. > > > > > > The exception itself sounds valid to me. > > > > > > Maybe: > > > > > > For now: Pre-check and adjustment? Seems to be specific to the > > quartz > > > impl. > > > > > > Parallel: Asking on the TCK/spec lists? > > > > > > Best > > > Richard Z > > > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 18.11.2020, 22:52 +0100 schrieb Jean-Louis > > Monteiro: > > > > Hi community, > > > > > > > > I found another thing I wanted to discuss and get feedback on. > > > > On the EJB 3.2 section of the TCK we are down to 5 failures all > > > > related to > > > > schedule/timers. > > > > > > > > To run them, use the following command > > > > > > > > ./runtests --web tomee-plume > > > > com.sun.ts.tests.ejb32.lite.timer.schedule.expire.Client > > > > > > > > This is the part failing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/blob/master/src/com/sun/ts/tests/ejb32/lite/timer/schedule/expire/Client.java#L231 > > > > > > > > java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: End time cannot be before > > start > > > > time > > > > >at > > > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.quartz.impl.triggers.CronTriggerImpl.setEndTime( > > > > > CronTriggerImpl.java:417) > > > > >at > > > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.EJBCronTrigger.(EJBCronTrigger. > > > > > java:121) > > > > >at > > > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.CalendarTimerData.initializeTrigger(C > > > >
Re: [TCK] EJB 3.2 timers
https://tck.work/tomee/build?id=1610964398253 100% green on EJB32 !!! -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 4:18 PM Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > Fantastic - thank you! > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:11 PM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > Went ahead and merged this PR and marked the jira as being resolved. I'm > > waiting for the build to finish and I'll fire a new TCK run over the > > weekend maybe so we can validate if it fixed or not the issue. > > -- > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:52 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > > > Here is the PR https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/749 > > > > > > I'm building locally and I'll run the EJB32 related tests locally first > > > -- > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:45 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi community, > > >> > > >> Finally got some time to think about this and fix it (I think ;-) ) > > >> > > >> There is one scenario where it is relevant. > > >> Let's imagine you restart an application, the timer may have expired > > >> because the end is already in the past, but we don't want to have to > > change > > >> the binary in order to set a valid end date to restart a server. > > >> > > >> In that case, we are expecting the server to successfully start, but > the > > >> timer to never trigger. > > >> > > >> I'll create a PR so you can double check before I merge it. > > >> -- > > >> Jean-Louis Monteiro > > >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > >> http://www.tomitribe.com > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 9:08 AM Jean-Louis Monteiro < > > >> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Thanks Richard for the quick feedback. > > >>> > > >>> I am totally with you. Can't think of a valid reason to do that or > even > > >>> think it should be a tested requirement in TCK. > > >>> If using endTime before startTime is the only way to specify a timer > > >>> never expires, something is wrong to me. > > >>> > > >>> I'll go ahead and see if I can adjust and at the same time raise an > > >>> issue on the TCK/EE side. > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 9:03 AM Zowalla, Richard < > > >>> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> wrote: > > >>> > > Hi, > > > > I think it is a bit odd in this tck test case, that the creation of > a > > timer with an end time before the start time should even be > possible, > > but nevermind :) > > > > I do not quite understand the reason why this behaviour was chosen > in > > the first place. I might miss something as I am not long enough in > the > > EE world. > > > > The exception itself sounds valid to me. > > > > Maybe: > > > > For now: Pre-check and adjustment? Seems to be specific to the > quartz > > impl. > > > > Parallel: Asking on the TCK/spec lists? > > > > Best > > Richard Z > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 18.11.2020, 22:52 +0100 schrieb Jean-Louis > Monteiro: > > > Hi community, > > > > > > I found another thing I wanted to discuss and get feedback on. > > > On the EJB 3.2 section of the TCK we are down to 5 failures all > > > related to > > > schedule/timers. > > > > > > To run them, use the following command > > > > > > ./runtests --web tomee-plume > > > com.sun.ts.tests.ejb32.lite.timer.schedule.expire.Client > > > > > > This is the part failing > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/blob/master/src/com/sun/ts/tests/ejb32/lite/timer/schedule/expire/Client.java#L231 > > > > > > java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: End time cannot be before > start > > > time > > > >at > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.quartz.impl.triggers.CronTriggerImpl.setEndTime( > > > > CronTriggerImpl.java:417) > > > >at > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.EJBCronTrigger.(EJBCronTrigger. > > > > java:121) > > > >at > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.CalendarTimerData.initializeTrigger(C > > > > alendarTimerData.java:61) > > > >at > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.TimerData.newTimer(TimerData.java:222 > > > > ) > > > >at > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.EjbTimerServiceImpl.initializeNewTime > > > > r(EjbTimerServiceImpl.java:738) > > > >at > > > > > > org.apache.openejb.core.timer.EjbTimerServiceImpl.createTimer(EjbTi > > > >
