[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-621) File component - file rename pattern to support patterns such as date time etc.

[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-621?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=45122#action_45122 ] Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-621: --- Yep I had a wide smile when the relative folder

code coverage reports - cobertura or clover

Hi I was wondering if it was possible to setup the CI server to once a week or so to run unit test with coverage enabled. I would love to have this auto generated once in a while to find gaps in our testing and where we could improve or even prepare for @deprecated obsolete code. I have run

[jira] Created: (CAMEL-843) Upgrade Quartz to 1.6.1 when its released

Upgrade Quartz to 1.6.1 when its released - Key: CAMEL-843 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-843 Project: Apache Camel Issue Type: Task Components: camel-quartz

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-494) CamelBeanPostProcessor.camelContext cannot be injected if SpringCamelContext is proxied (e.g. AOP)

[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-494?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=45124#action_45124 ] Dean Thompson commented on CAMEL-494: - Sadly, I don't have time to focus on this for a

[jira] Created: (AMQNET-106) Add support for prefetchSIze = 0 in NMS

Add support for prefetchSIze = 0 in NMS --- Key: AMQNET-106 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQNET-106 Project: ActiveMQ .Net Issue Type: New Feature Components: ActiveMQ Client

Re: CPP: Do transactions work in CMS 2.2?

Doing some more debugging - I think I might have seen the same problem with NMS too - I'll try and confirm. Is there anything odd in the way I'm using commit()?? Thanks in advance Richard Richard Gillingham wrote: Hi I've swaped from AutoAcknowledge to transactional sessions and am

Re: CPP: Do transactions work in CMS 2.2?

No, your code looks fine. I spent about an hour on this last night but haven't come to any conclusions on what the problem might be. If you can create an issue and log anything that you find in there that would be helpful. http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP Regards Tim. On Fri,

Re: SAXParserException with amq namespace.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:07 PM, PJGratz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am receiving errors when trying to parse out an XML Configuration file that contains the amq namespace. The matching wildcard is strict, but no declaration can be found for element 'amq:broker' I used two beans

[jira] Created: (AMQCPP-195) Message stuck in queue when using transactional sessions

Message stuck in queue when using transactional sessions Key: AMQCPP-195 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-195 Project: ActiveMQ C++ Client Issue Type: Bug

[jira] Created: (AMQ-1905) Method required: ObjectName[] ConnectionViewMBean.getConsumers()

Method required: ObjectName[] ConnectionViewMBean.getConsumers() Key: AMQ-1905 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1905 Project: ActiveMQ Issue Type:

[jira] Created: (AMQ-1906) create ProducerViewMBean so we can see producer activity in JMX

create ProducerViewMBean so we can see producer activity in JMX --- Key: AMQ-1906 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1906 Project: ActiveMQ Issue Type: Improvement

[jira] Updated: (AMQ-1907) method required: ObjectName SubscriptionViewMBean.getConnection()

[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1907?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] James Strachan updated AMQ-1907: Component/s: JMX method required: ObjectName SubscriptionViewMBean.getConnection()

[jira] Created: (AMQ-1907) method required: ObjectName SubscriptionViewMBean.getConnection()

method required: ObjectName SubscriptionViewMBean.getConnection() -- Key: AMQ-1907 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1907 Project: ActiveMQ Issue Type:

[jira] Commented: (AMQ-1906) create ProducerViewMBean so we can see producer activity in JMX

[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=45123#action_45123 ] James Strachan commented on AMQ-1906: - this method would be handy too {code} Object[]

[jira] Created: (AMQ-1908) add retryMessage() method to QueueViewMBean to make it easy to retry a DLQ message

add retryMessage() method to QueueViewMBean to make it easy to retry a DLQ message -- Key: AMQ-1908 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1908 Project:

[jira] Resolved: (AMQ-1908) add retryMessage() method to QueueViewMBean to make it easy to retry a DLQ message

[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] James Strachan resolved AMQ-1908. - Resolution: Fixed add retryMessage() method to QueueViewMBean to make it easy to retry a DLQ

[jira] Created: (AMQ-1909) moving messages with QueueViewMBean.moveMessage() or QueueViewMBean.retryMessage() seems to delete the message but it often never shows up in the other Queue!

moving messages with QueueViewMBean.moveMessage() or QueueViewMBean.retryMessage() seems to delete the message but it often never shows up in the other Queue!

[jira] Updated: (AMQ-1909) QueueViewMBean.retryMessage() often seems to fail without retrying

[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1909?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] James Strachan updated AMQ-1909: Summary: QueueViewMBean.retryMessage() often seems to fail without retrying (was: moving

Re: aqctivemq-dotnet releases

I am in the process of creating a 1.0 release right now. On 8/22/08, kingpin_rcs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking at the activemq-dotnet source repository I see no tags or branches. I want to use a stable release but it appears that there is not one yet. What exactly is the status of this

RE: activeMq hangs after long time using

thank you all firstly we removed the mutex in the onTransportException. and it does not hang up for more than 24 hours and it is still working well now. we wonder whether there will be anything else wrong after we remove the mutex. thanks eric tabish121 wrote: I wouldn't recommend that.