Re: [VOTE] Not stripping some files from cactus mailing list?

+1 Standard disclaimer: apologies for the terseness of this email, I'm typing with a broken wrist. Nicholas Lesiecki Software Craftsman, specializing in J2EE, Agile Methods, and aspect-oriented programming m: 520 591-1849 Books: * Mastering AspectJ: http://tinyurl.com/66vf * Java Tool

Re: [VOTE] Magnus Grimsell as a committer

+1 Nicholas Lesiecki Software Craftsman, specializing in J2EE, Agile Methods, and aspect-oriented programming m: 520 591-1849 Books: * Mastering AspectJ: http://tinyurl.com/66vf * Java Tools for Extreme Programming: http://tinyurl.com/66vt Articles on AspectJ: * http://tinyurl.com/66vu and http

Re: [VOTE] Kazuhito as committer

cribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nicholas Lesiecki Software Craftsman, specializing in J2EE, Agile Methods, and aspect-oriented programming Books: * Mastering AspectJ: http://tinyurl.com/66vf * Java Tools for Extreme Programming: http://tinyurl

Re: [idea] need for a new cactus task?

er. From then on, the Servlet Test Runner can take over as it would for a request coming from a browser. I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to display results in end. any ideas? What do you think? I could work on this. Regards, Sumati Nicholas Lesiecki Software Craftsman, specializing in J2E

Re: Cactus build should now be much easier. Need feedback

I'm looking forward to trying it, though I don't know when that will be. No need to edit any file to get going! No need to manually download any jar! I'm *very* excited. Cheers, nick On May 23, 2004, at 12:34 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: Hi Cactus users/developers, I've just modified the Cactus build

Re: [VOTE] Ant 1.6.1+ to build Cactus

+1 On May 22, 2004, at 5:08 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: Hi, I'd like to make it mandatory to use Ant 1.6.1 to build Cactus from the source. The Cactus distribution will remain compatible with Ant 1.4+. The reason is that I need some features from Ant 1.6.1 to more easily add support for J2EE 1.4 and

Cactus work over weekend

Hello Developers, I thought that I would get a chance to look at the thread synchronization problem this weekend, and I also thought that I would get some time over SD West (some weeks ago). Neither actually happened. Thinking about this, I realize that I haven't been very active on this proje

Re: [ANN] Fisheye for Cactus

Not a bad tool. Much nicer view of CVS than the standard web CVS view. Cheers, nick On Apr 4, 2004, at 11:56 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: Hi, TheCortex (creator of Clover) has announced a new product called FishEye (http://fisheye.thecortex.net/). It's an SCM mining tool. They have run it on Cactu

Re: Cactus redux

- API 1 is useful to any container writer in particular. Thus I believe containers like Geronimo must probably already have such an API. I'll ask on the Geronimo mailing list to check it out. If they do, and if this API is nicely packaged in a thin jar (a jar used to manipulate servlet deployment d

Re: [VOTE] Remove Cactus project in bugzilla?

+1 On Mar 24, 2004, at 11:33 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: Hi, Now that we have moved to JIRA for our bug traking, can we remove the Cactus project in Bugzilla to prevent people using it? Here's my +1 Thanks -Vincent - To unsubscribe

Re: [VOTE] Following HttpClient 3.x or staying with HttpClient 2.x?

I'm +1 for sticking with 2.0. We can switch if we want to when they have stabilized. Cheers, Nick On Mar 15, 2004, at 10:43 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: -Original Message- From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 March 2004 00:28 To: Cactus Developers List Subject: Re: [V

Re: [VOTE] Do we also remove authors in xdocs?

+1 for consistency n On Mar 11, 2004, at 3:03 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: Hi, We've removed @author tags in source code. Do you also want to continue with removing authors properties in xdocs? For example: Coding Conventions would simply become: Coding Conv

Re: Race condition, what do we do? (was DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24842] - java.lang.NullPointerException in first test -- thread synchronization prob?)

Ok, I'm sorry I haven't responded to this until now. I think the thread sleep pause suggested by Per is a bad idea, because, as he points out, the problem could be a race condition. The sleep could cover 90% or cases but leave open a different case. A cursory look through CVS did not confirm o

Re: [VOTE] Move from bugzilla to JIRA

Can't you just filter on cvs-commit in the name? I used to do that and it works quite well. Of course, if you're doing digest mode... Never mind. +1 on the separate list idea if it's not too much trouble to implement. (I plan to subscribe) Cheers, Nick On Mar 8, 2004, at 7:47 PM, Chad Woolley w

Re: [VOTE] Move from bugzilla to JIRA

I'm not fond of bugzilla, so if we have an alternative that you prefer, I'm all for it: +1 nick On Mar 7, 2004, at 4:01 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: Hi gang, I'd like to propose moving our bugs from bugzilla to JIRA. I can see several reasons for doing this: 1/ I've personally been using JIRA for t

Re: Race condition, what do we do? (was DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24842] - java.lang.NullPointerException in first test -- thread synchronization prob?)

Sorry I haven't responded to this. It's been on my list of things to do, I just haven't had time... This week is looking good for it but not today. Cheers, Nick On Feb 27, 2004, at 4:08 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: Chris/Nick, What do we do about this? Do you have any idea? It's a complex topic a

Re: [VOTE] Removing author tags (was RE: 1.6 or 1.5.1? (was RE: [VOTE] Releasing Cactus 1.5.1?))

Ok, I'm convinced: +1 1.6 +1 NOTICE name change +1 remove author tags (I don't even need the reasoning, I don't like author tags period. : ) On Feb 28, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: -Original Message- From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 February 2004 15:

Re: [VOTE] Releasing Cactus 1.5.1?

Seems there are enough bug fixes to warrant a release, but 1.6 implies a major fix or additional functionality. 1.5.1 will only be as new as 1.6dev for a short while. Soon 1.6dev builds will be newer. So I guess I'd go with 1.5.1. But I don't feel strongly. +1 on release +0 on 1.5.1 Nick On Feb

Re: [VOTE] Migrate to new Apache 2.0 license now?

nse? > > Here's my +1 > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Nicholas Lesiecki Software Craftsman, specia

Re: [Vote/Action plan/Feedback] Cactus2

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond to your excellent proposal Vincent, the holidays have been very busy for me. On 12/24/03 4:21 AM, "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi cactus committers, > > As every day goes by, I am more and more excited about Cactus v2 (see > http://blogs.co

Re: My last commit on AbstractCactusTestCase

> As you have all noticed, this is not going to work... :-) For lots of > reasons. Let me implement it and I'll come back with a proper solution > :-) > > -Vincent :) I share Chris' concern that the framework we have may be too thin to be pluggable. However, I am all for experimenting with the f

Re: [proposal] Cactus new vision (2)

I'm all for the term "broker". What exactly does a broker do? I don't ask so much because I don't have a good general guess, but rather I want to hear what are the common behaviors that every protocol will support. Cheers, Nick -- Nicholas Lesiecki Software Craftsman, sp

Re: Use HTTP header instead of unique ID?

Sorry for another long response cycle, I wanted to get some time to digest the several emails on the topic. To reiterate, since I'm still holding the ball on implementing this: The proposed solution is to store the test results in application scope under a test-unique key. (And document Cactus's

Re: Use HTTP header instead of unique ID?

OK, so we have several tensions we need to resolve. Our basic requirements are: 1) The execution of a servlet-based test case must be allowed to pass a text response back to the client for inspection and verification. 2) The test case must be able to retrieve its results from the server, includin

Re: Serializing test case classes

(Sorry I'm late in jumping onto this thread) This seems like a good idea because it will finally eliminate the counterintuitive behavior of the test state not persisting from the client to the server. However, will the test be reserialized and sent back to the client to be finished? It seems like

Re: [Proposal/Vote] Breaking API in Cactus 1.6

I'm +1 for this refactoring, though I probably won't have time to help. Cheers, Nick On 10/31/03 1:00 PM, "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to perform a full overhaul of our package organization. The > reason is that we are currently not showing our users what API i

Re: [VOTE] Proposal for new build directory structure

Sounds fine to me, +1. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Clover?

As you all know, I am a big proponent of advanced testing techniques. (Heh, I guess anyone following this list probably is.) So, on the whole, I like the idea of Clover. However, I'd like to raise the question of whether we think it's providing enough benefit to the development effort to justify it

Re: [Q] Should we use "1.2" and "1.3" instead of "12" and "13"?

Sounds like a sensible change. I'm in favor. Nick On 9/21/03 3:28 AM, "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to have your opinion. The idea would be to change the valid > values for our j2ee.api property. From "12" and "13" to "1.2" and "1.3". > > Rationale: > - The API

Re: [Q] New structure for cactus documentations?

I'm in favor of the distributed documentation. It should also make maintaining the docs a little more straightforward. Cheers, nick On 9/20/03 3:40 PM, "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to do some brainstorming on how we want to manage the Cactus > documentation in

Re: [PROPOSAL] Archive old cactus releases

Robert, This seems fine to me, +0. Vincent and Christopher may have other opinions. Cheers, nick On 9/10/03 3:00 PM, "robert burrell donkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the apache software foundation policy concerning releases is now that all > releases should be available only through: > > 1

Re: Moving UniqueId to the server side

Hello developers, I attempted to implement the move of the uniqueID to the server side. Naively, I attempted to set the generated results id as a header in the response to the initial CALL_TEST service. Here is my code: (from AbstractWebTestCaller.java) private void addResultsIdHeaderToResponse(

Unit tests for server side code?

Hi guys, ' I notice we don't have any unit tests for server-side cactus code, or at least, that's what's implied by the following comment: " Run all the unit tests of Cactus that do not need a servlet environment to run. These other tests will be exercised in the sample application." (From TestAl

How to integration test the unique id?

Hi all, Does anyone have any ideas about how to integration test the unique id functionality? Essentially it will be known to work when two test results are never confused in a multi-threaded/multi-JVM environment. This happened to me all the time when running FilterTestCases at eBlox. I am, howev

Build failure

Team, I hope I got my build problems resolved, and that my passing tests now accurately reflect a successful build. If not I'll see what I can do tomorrow morning... Cheers, nick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For a

Re: Your commits

Hey, thanks. > etc. I wanted to say that it is not because I sent several emails that I > do not view your code positively. Quite the opposite! That's fine, I always welcome constructive criticism. Or even informational criticism. I just wish we could pair. Email discussions are so inefficient!

Re: cvs commit:jakarta-cactus/framework/src/java/share/org/apache/cactusAbstractWebServerTestCase.java

I implemented your general suggestions. I'm afraid I didn't understand very well what you meant by limiting the size of the key to 32 bits. By odd coincidence, my generated ids end up at approx. 32 characters. I don't think we should be too concerned about the exact number of bytes pushed about. If

Re: cvs commit:jakarta-cactus/samples/servlet/src/test-cactus/share/org/apache/cactus/sample/unit TestHttpSession.java

Bizarrely, this does not fail on my box. Maybe if I were to run against a another container... In any case, I made a change that I hope should fix it. And the tests still pass. I'm making this change on the plane, so I can't DL another container. Let me know if it works... Cheers, Nick On 6/23/03

My changes

I never managed to get Tomcat working, so my committed changes haven't been tested on it. :( Overview: I added the concept of a uniqueId to the WebRequest according to Chris' suggestion and refactored slightly to support the future addition of custom headers instead of request parameters. I haven

Re: Reopening the Aspects Debate

at org.apache.tools.ant.types.Path.list(Path.java:320) ... Any thoughts? Cheers, nick On 6/20/03 3:54 AM, "Christopher Lenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicholas Lesiecki wrote: >> >>> As you said, I don't think a simpleAspectJ integration app fits too well >

Re: Reopening the Aspects Debate

s, run the unit tests, and run the acceptance tests I suppose I could figure it out in an hour or so, but any pointers would be appreciated. Cheers, nick On 6/20/03 3:54 AM, "Christopher Lenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicholas Lesiecki wrote: >> >>> As y

Re: Reopening the Aspects Debate

etion of the custom tag testing framework. (Presuming the replacement of redirectors with AOP is a reasonably large endeavor that won't be fully tackled any time soon.) Cheers, Nick On 6/18/03 11:24 PM, "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>

On the subject of Mock Objects

I know the fellow developing this. Seems very ambitious, but if he pulls it off, it could be quite nice... http://www.virtualmock.org/ Cheers, Nick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [

Reopening the Aspects Debate

Hello Cactus developers, A long while back (just about a year ago, to be precise) I wrote up an article on JUnit, AspectJ, and Cactus. http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-aspectj2/ At the time, I envisioned myself writing a Cactus sample application that would use AspectJ to rep

RE: Cactus and AspectJ

t; > -----Original Message- > > From: Nicholas Lesiecki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 06 February 2003 01:14 > > To: Cactus Developers List > > Subject: RE: Cactus and AspectJ > > > > In response to Vincent: > > <<< > > 1/ as a

RE: [VOTE] Changing location of release and dev docs

+1 (to both) > -Original Message- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 3:58 AM > To: 'Cactus Developers List' > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Changing location of release and dev docs > > > I'm +1 for this too. I'm working towards this but we need to

RE: Cactus and AspectJ

In response to Vincent: <<< 1/ as a development tool for the cactus framework itself, i.e. find other usages in addition to logging. I'm open to suggestion. BTW, this is what I find the hardest in AOP: finding usages for it (it may have to do with my mindset working in "traditional" ways!) >>> I a

RE: [VOTE summary] Last call for choosing a name for our front ends projects

Sorry I didn't weigh in on this until now... The agreed upon solution gets a +0 from me. I liked the petal/thorn style names, but seeing them used in CVS made me a little nervous since their names were not transparent. Cheers, nick > -Original Message- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMA

RE: Cactus and AspectJ

I mean to respond to this, I just haven't had the time yet. I will probably do so sometime this week. Cheers, Nick > -Original Message- > From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 9:08 AM > To: Cactus Developers List > Subject: Cactus and AspectJ

RE: [GUMP] Build Failure - jakarta-cactus-sample-servlet-13

+1 (even later) > -Original Message- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 12:22 PM > To: 'Cactus Developers List' > Subject: RE: [GUMP] Build Failure - jakarta-cactus-sample-servlet-13 > > > +1 (a bit late ;-)). > > Thanks > -Vincent > >

RE: cvs commit: jakarta-cactus/documentation build.properties.sample build.xml

> While handling classpaths for tasks such as checkstyle makes the build > file a bit more complex, it does make the build process itself easier > IMHO. Do we really want to force everyone who wants to build Cactus from > source maintain a Cactus-specific Ant installation? As someone who's struggl

RE: [VOTE] New committer: Christopher Lenz

+1 > -Original Message- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 2:44 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [VOTE] New committer: Christopher Lenz > > > Hi, > > I'd like to propose a new committer: Christopher Lenz. > > He has already submitted se

RE: [Vote] New Committer : Julien Ruaux

+1 from me. > -Original Message- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 10:38 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: 'Julien Ruaux' > Subject: [Vote] New Committer : Julien Ruaux > > > Cactus committers, > > I would to propose the nomination of Jul

RE: [VOTE] new committer : Jason van Zyl

+1 I'm interested to see what Maven can do for us. -Original Message- From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 3:42 AM To: 'Cactus Developers List' Subject: [VOTE] new committer : Jason van Zyl Hi, I'd like to propose a new Cactus committer : Jason

RE: [proposal] Build reorganisation

:) heh. And after I agreed to your last one, I found this. Just do it! :) (Which is what you're saying of course.) -Original Message- From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 1:31 PM To: 'Cactus Developers List' Subject: RE: [proposal] Build reorgani

RE: [proposal] Build reorganisation

Although I would have gone with your other plan, I do think this one is the best :) Cheers, nick -Original Message- From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 3:53 AM To: 'Cactus Developers List' Subject: RE: [proposal] Build reorganisation Hum ...

RE: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/cactus/ServletTestCase

index.html (a paper by Ted Neward explaining the subtleties in the Java classloader model: a worthwhile read for anyone doing web app development). Thanks for contributing! Cheers, Nicholas Lesiecki -Original Message- From: Volkmann, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday,

RE: Switching to context ClassLoader?

Yes, we should probably switch this. I'll see if I can looka t it when I have a moment. Cheers, Nick -Original Message- From: Marko Balabanovic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 2:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Switching to context ClassLoader? I've n

AspectJ article

Hey, since Cactus uses AspectJ to do logging, I thought an article on AspectJ might be of interest to the list (especially since the article uses Cactus as a case study). It's currently headlining IBM's developerworks: http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/?loc=dwmain Nichola

RE: [Coding style] Qualified imports

+0 (I don't have any feelings about it either way.) -Original Message- From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 2:14 PM To: 'Cactus Developers List' Subject: [Coding style] Qualified imports Hi, I'd like to use qualified imports (i.e. full class na

RE: 2 new features in CVS

I really like the per-test redirector override. Now we caqn make out own redirectors if we wish... -Original Message- From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 2:30 PM To: 'Cactus Developers List' Subject: 2 new features in CVS Hi, I have added toda

Logging

---Original Message----- > From: Nicholas Lesiecki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 January 2002 16:07 > To: Cactus Developers List > Subject: RE: Adding Authentication To Cactus > > I noticed we still have code convention about logging on the contributors > page. I could edi

RE: Adding Authentication To Cactus

I have no idea why my last subject line reads like that. -Original Message- From: Nicholas Lesiecki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 9:07 AM To: Cactus Developers List Subject: RE: Adding Authentication To Cactus I noticed we still have code convention about

RE: Adding Authentication To Cactus

I noticed we still have code convention about logging on the contributors page. I could edit this sometime this weekend if you like. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

RE: Adding Authentication To Cactus

Jason, Thanks a lot for submitting this! we'll look it over and provide feedback to you (Vincent will probably have more than I do...) sometime within the next few days. thanks, Nicholas Lesiecki Technical Team Lead eBlox, Inc. (520) 615-9345 x104 Check out my new book!: Java Tools for Ex

RE: [ANNOUNCE] StrutsTestCase v1.5 - now with Cactus support!

Pity he scooped you, your stuff was nice! Cheers, nick -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 1:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] StrutsTestCase v1.5 - now with Cactus support! Nick, Never mind my test case..

RE: Erik Hatcher's Struts Test case

What do we think about including Erik hatcher's submission in Cactus 1.3--perhaps in an optional download, or in a package such as org.apache.cactus.extensions? I looked over the class, and it seemed pretty clean. Certainly a lot of Cactus users are Struts users and vice versa. Opinions? cheers,

RE: [proposal] Cactus v2

Hello, I think the proposed redesign of Cactus sounds like a great idea. I'm not sure it will work out, or work out exactly as Vincent has outlined, but that's what OS is all about--experimentation and cool stuff. JUnit is in fact a very simple framework, and I think that we should strive to kee