Hi Tom,
I investigated your patches...
For the JAASJettyRealm, I altered your patches slightly. I changed the
isUserInRole to test if the user or role is null and return false if so.
Tomcat handles it this way. Thanks for the heads up on this.
The empty String for a role should be caught
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-646?page=comments#action_66426 ]
Jeff Genender commented on GERONIMO-646:
For the JAASJettyRealm, I altered your patches slightly. I changed the
isUserInRole to test if the user or role is null
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-646?page=all ]
Jeff Genender reassigned GERONIMO-646:
--
Assign To: Alan Cabrera
Servlet calling HttpServletRequest.isUserInRole(null) causes NPE using Jetty
container
David Blevins wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 11:31:40PM -0700, David Blevins wrote:
...now that I have your attention :) More importantly, who is willing to volunteer to test and
give a works or doesn't work report?
Any volunteers? Consider this the signup sheet.
We have three so far.
Hi
I'm new to Geronimo. But these days I'm going through M3. But I will try
to do some work. Please let me know what I suppoed to do.
Thushantha De Alwis
David Blevins wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 11:31:40PM -0700, David Blevins wrote:
...now that I have your attention :) More
Is the M4 not available for download?
sanjaya.
- Original Message -
From: Thushantha De Alwis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: Who wants an M4 release?
Hi
I'm new to Geronimo. But these days I'm going
through M3. But I
Hi,
I am intrested in doing some contribution to geronimo.
Best way to start is to test. Iam not an expert of
j2ee, but will do my best. Pls let me know the
expected .
Thanks
Rahman
--- Thushantha De Alwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
I'm new to Geronimo. But these days I'm going
through
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-655?page=all ]
anita kulshreshtha updated GERONIMO-655:
Attachment: tomcatlogging.zip
Oops.., Here is the permission.
Logging in Tomcat
-
Key: GERONIMO-655
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-655?page=all ]
anita kulshreshtha updated GERONIMO-655:
Attachment: tomcatlogging.zip
Logging in Tomcat
-
Key: GERONIMO-655
URL:
The unstable release or the source code is the closest to M4...use that
for now.
Jeff
sanjaya gayan wrote:
Is the M4 not available for download?
sanjaya.
- Original Message -
From: Thushantha De Alwis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 2:38 PM
Thanks a lot David! Your answer helps me a lot...
I'm working on the application to use TM and connector
modules without the entire Geronimo server.
I'm using Tranql to configure datasource. I see that
tranql connector doesn't support XA transactions
according to the ra.xml file... Is it possible
Logging in Tomcat
-
Key: GERONIMO-655
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-655
Project: Geronimo
Type: New Feature
Components: Tomcat
Versions: 1.0-M4
Environment: All Environments
Reporter: anita kulshreshtha
Lets get this out for discussion. AFAIK, currently Jetty does not come
with these things automatically enabled (correct me if I am wrong but
did not notice a config for Jetty). Deployer and client do, but I do
not see Jetty.
Therefore, I think we need to be consistent...if we make this
Hi,
I can also give a hand on testing. Specially on the Spec side( Java mail, activation).
At the moment i'm using the Geronimo spec Java mail Activation
implementations to give the Attachment support for the Axis 2 project.
At the moment I found out that Java Mail implementation has bug when it
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-655?page=all ]
Jeff Genender reassigned GERONIMO-655:
--
Assign To: Jeff Genender
Logging in Tomcat
-
Key: GERONIMO-655
URL:
Invalid Login in deployer should not print the stack trace
--
Key: GERONIMO-656
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-656
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Versions: 1.0-M4
Environment: All
Jetty logs are directed to jetty__mm_dd.log using
JettyRequestLog gbean. When we decide to provide the
facility to replace Jetty with Tomcat, the Logger
gbean in tomcat can be used to replace JettyRequestLog
in j2ee-server-plan.xml.
--- Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lets get this out
Thilina Gunarathne wrote:
Hi,
I can also give a hand on testing. Specially on the Spec side( Java mail,
activation).
At the moment i'm using the Geronimo spec Java mail Activation
implementations to give the Attachment support for the Axis 2 project.
At the moment I found out that Java Mail
Ok cool, I did a build on
OS X 10.4.1 / Java 1.4.2_07
took an hour (I was also watching a movie on my slow powerbook).
The build works, and the server starts.
So what is next? :-)
I have a bunch of Spring applications that I would like to deploy. I
think I'm just going to see how that
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the
final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just
branch for the stable, and head is unstable?
geir
On May 27, 2005, at 12:07 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Stefan brings up the question of whether we want to
BTW, however we resolve stable and unstable, I really do like the
idea of a separate sandbox tree. That will make things very clear to
people.
geir
On May 27, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the
final push for
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the final
push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just branch for
the stable, and head is unstable?
The names are just suggestions - trunk, head, unstable, whatever.
The important thing
On May 27, 2005, at 12:40 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the
final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just
branch for the stable, and head is unstable?
The names are just suggestions
On May 27, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On May 27, 2005, at 12:40 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the
final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not
just branch for the
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote, On 5/27/2005 12:27 PM:
BTW, however we resolve stable and unstable, I really do like the
idea of a separate sandbox tree. That will make things very clear to
people.
I like that idea as well.
Regards,
Alan
I'm not entirely sure what you are asking. Neither tranql nor anyone
else has any magic xa elixir to wrap a non-xa database and make it have
xa semantics. However, you can deploy local-transaction only resource
adapters in geronimo and have them participate in JTA transactions.
Geronimo
On Fri, 27 May 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
so we have /trunk and /branches/stable and /branches/unstable, the
former for release work, and the latter for really nutty stuff that
people want to work on, and head is where mainline development
continues?
Who's responsible for
On May 27, 2005, at 6:07 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Stefan brings up the question of whether we want to release sub-
modules of Geronimo separately. I think this is a good idea and
would propose the following restructure of the tree to move in this
direction.
Let me just explain my
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-542?page=all ]
Dain Sundstrom closed GERONIMO-542:
---
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version: 1.0-M4
The GBean registry no longer consults JMX at all.
kernel.listGBeans returns mbeans that are not
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
so we have /trunk and /branches/stable and /branches/unstable, the
former for release work, and the latter for really nutty stuff that
people want to work on, and head is where mainline development
continues?
Who's
On May 27, 2005, at 8:25 PM, Brian K. Wallace wrote:
...
I'm not a committer, nor have I been more than an observer to what
Geronimo is doing and where it's going - primarily because everything
I've seen has placed it in the JBoss realm. I've used JBoss for
quite a
while and am always
I'm worried that it would be a giant hassle to try to assemble a
geronimo that is 90% stable and 10% unstable.
I also don't see the advantage of this plan over simply creating a
branch whenever someone wants to do some disruptive experimentation,
and merging the results back in when
In the Module Restructuring thread a couple people indicated how nice
it would be if it was easy to set up limited purpose geronimo versions,
such as web-only.
Making this easy has always been one of our aims. Two existing
examples are openejb (ejb + jta + j2ca) and IBM gluecode se (formerly
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-636?page=comments#action_66488 ]
Dain Sundstrom commented on GERONIMO-636:
-
This is normally caused by the mx4j remoting jar not being on the system
classpath. The normal geronimo executable
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-631?page=all ]
Dain Sundstrom reassigned GERONIMO-631:
---
Assign To: John Sisson
Good idea. Thanks for volunteering :)
Package Derby tools with Geronimo
-
Running configurations not saved on shutdown
Key: GERONIMO-657
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-657
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Reporter: Dain Sundstrom
When the server shuts down the current
David Jencks wrote:
I'm worried that it would be a giant hassle to try to assemble a
geronimo that is 90% stable and 10% unstable.
I would have thought that would be an assembly that used 90% stable
module versions and 10% unstable ones. Where would the hassle be?
I also don't see the
Stefan
This is exactly what we have been aiming for :-)
To a large extent you can already do this today. You can mix-and-match
the different modules simply by providing a custom configuration plan.
As a concrete example, this is what we did at Gluecode to build the JOE
SE product which
David Jencks wrote:
In the Module Restructuring thread a couple people indicated how nice it
would be if it was easy to set up limited purpose geronimo versions,
such as web-only.
Making this easy has always been one of our aims. Two existing examples
are openejb (ejb + jta + j2ca) and IBM
Yea, I was just about to post that. Stable/unstable refers to branches.
-David
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 12:18:03PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the
final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just
branch for
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:40:52AM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the final
push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just branch for
the stable, and head is unstable?
The names are just
On May 27, 2005, at 4:25 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Yea, I was just about to post that. Stable/unstable refers to
branches.
But jeremy is right here (but forgot to say it) - because we're using
SVN, you want to keep the branches in a separate root so that
svn co geronimo
doesn't
In geronimo only the attributes explicitly marked as persistent in
the GBeanInfo are serialized. The magic attributes are not allowed
to be marked as persistent.
-dain
On May 25, 2005, at 6:23 AM, Srinath Perera wrote:
Hi Hiram;
I will try to give a possible reason ..
Not all the
David Blevins wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:40:52AM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the
final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just
branch for the stable, and head is unstable?
The
On 5/27/05, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the reasons for going with a modular structure in the first place
was to make the totality more manageable while still being able to
develop each module. For small projects I would agree it is probably not
worth it, but most large
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 06:33:49PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On May 27, 2005, at 4:25 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Yea, I was just about to post that. Stable/unstable refers to
branches.
But jeremy is right here (but forgot to say it) - because we're using
SVN, you want to
Bruce Snyder wrote:
On 5/27/05, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the reasons for going with a modular structure in the first place
was to make the totality more manageable while still being able to
develop each module. For small projects I would agree it is probably not
worth it,
David Blevins wrote:
This one
../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction
../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction
--
Jeremy
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:26 PM:
David Blevins wrote:
This one
../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction
../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction
Why would we have two versions of transaction?
Regards,
Alan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
|
|
| Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:26 PM:
|
| David Blevins wrote:
|
| This one
|
|
| ../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction
| ../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction
|
| Why would we have two
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:26 PM:
David Blevins wrote:
This one
../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction
../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction
Why would we have two versions of transaction?
I actually think there are going to be
Brian K. Wallace wrote:
curiosity
Wouldn't the proper use of svn:externals take care of a lot of this?
have svn co geronimo basically read from the externals to pull whatever
modules (as well as other components) you want while letting each module
handle its own stable/unstable structure?
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:38 PM:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:26 PM:
David Blevins wrote:
This one
../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction
../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction
Why would we have two versions of
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 04:38:45PM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:26 PM:
David Blevins wrote:
This one
../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction
../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction
Why would we
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I don't particularly care for odd/even designations for
stable/unstable. Maybe that was a coincidence in your example.
I'm not tied to any of the names - it was deliberate but illustrative. I
do think it would be useful for users to be able to tell just from a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
| Brian K. Wallace wrote:
|
| curiosity
| Wouldn't the proper use of svn:externals take care of a lot of this?
| have svn co geronimo basically read from the externals to pull whatever
| modules (as well as other components) you
--- Stefan Arentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 27, 2005, at 6:07 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
snip/
So, what I would really like to see wrt Geronimo is
an absolute
minimal server with add-on packages for things like
a web container,
jms provider, etc. You want to host a web app?
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:52 PM:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I don't particularly care for odd/even designations for
stable/unstable. Maybe that was a coincidence in your example.
I'm not tied to any of the names - it was deliberate but illustrative.
I do think it would be
David Blevins wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:51 PM:
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 04:38:45PM -0700, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote, On 5/27/2005 7:26 PM:
David Blevins wrote:
This one
Brian K. Wallace wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
| Brian K. Wallace wrote:
|
| curiosity
| Wouldn't the proper use of svn:externals take care of a lot of this?
| have svn co geronimo basically read from the externals to pull whatever
| modules (as well as other components) you want while letting
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Anything in trunk or branch is unstable. Anything in tag is stable.
A tag though represents a single point in time. We really need stable
and unstable branches as I tried to characterise them in the mail that
started this thread.
We can easily support your
61 matches
Mail list logo
