Well, Joe's been keeping a list for me, I just need time to go through
it. I'm hoping to do so today and this weekend.
Aaron
On 11/3/05, Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aaron,
There are a number of open JIRA issues for the console that are bug related
rather than architecture issues.
Undeploy using Deployment Manager fails to undeploy application
---
Key: GERONIMO-1132
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1132
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Components: deployment
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1132?page=comments#action_12356780
]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1132:
To fix this problem in the console we simply stop the configuration before we
undeploy. To stop the configuration means really
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1132?page=comments#action_12356781
]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1132:
Actually, now that I think about it my last append is probably wrong (stopping
the configuration and trying to call a method
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1132?page=comments#action_12356786
]
Sachin Patel commented on GERONIMO-1132:
The following fix worked. The run() method of the UndeployCommand should be
changed to do the following:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1132?page=comments#action_12356787
]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1132:
This is exactly the same logic that I inlcuded in the console fix.
However, it looks to me (as mentioned in my earlier
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2682445
UUID primary key generator
--
Key: GERONIMO-1133
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1133
Project: Geronimo
Type: New Feature
Components: OpenEJB
Reporter: Dain Sundstrom
Assigned to: Gianny Damour
Many application
One zero, no negative votes, an unofficial plus one in the form of
Works for me from Aaron, and nine plus ones.
+1 Jeff, Bruce, Matt, David J, Dain, John, David B, Geir, Jacek
0 Alan
For archival purposes, see original discussion thread:
Subject: gbuild subproject? Message-Id:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1133?page=comments#action_12356804
]
Davanum Srinivas commented on GERONIMO-1133:
We can borrow this one -
With Geronimo 1.0 quickly approaching, I think we should talk about
how we would like to package the binaries for release. This has
downstream impact on tck testing, and since I'm working on the TCK
build right now, I'd like to know what we are going to need to test.
So to get the
Would someone mind reviewing the patch for approval for 1109? It
introduces shutdown.bat and shutdown.sh and a single class StopServer
placed in the deployment module.
Thanks.
--
Sachin
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1128?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom updated GERONIMO-1128:
Fix Version: 1.1
Derby Log Viewer performance problem
Key: GERONIMO-1128
URL:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1108?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom updated GERONIMO-1108:
Fix Version: 1.1
(was: 1.0)
CertManagerPortlet is being loaded for the SecurityRealms portlet
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-239?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom updated GERONIMO-239:
---
Fix Version: 1.1
(was: 1.0)
Should be able to dump .car file
Key: GERONIMO-239
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-358?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom updated GERONIMO-358:
---
Fix Version: 1.1
(was: 1.0)
JSR-88 deployer should work remotely
Key:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-358?page=all ]
Aaron Mulder updated GERONIMO-358:
--
Fix Version: 1.0
(was: 1.1)
Sorry, I'm not willing to put this one off. :)
JSR-88 deployer should work remotely
Just pasting this here so i don't loose it. Disregard if not
interested.
It takes the versions out of project.properties and puts them in
project.xml
#!/bin/bash
for n in $(cat project.properties | grep '_version='); do
echo artifactId: ${n/=*/}, version: ${n/*=/}
perl -i -pe
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
I found the root cause, but did not a solution.
The solution is to work with the latest release of PetStore 1.4 that
works fine.
The question I won't probably answer myself easily is why I didn't work
with the version before? ;)
Jacek
In the giant image for the logo, the big G does not appear to be
centered in the image. Could we request a revised version with the G
centered? (I, or to be more specific Erin, noticed this when
plastering that image across the front page of a presentation.)
Thanks,
Aaron
It would be cool if we could get the logo as a layered photoshop
original. This will enable us to work with the logo over the next
many years.
-dain
On Nov 4, 2005, at 5:17 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
In the giant image for the logo, the big G does not appear to be
centered in the image.
Aaron,
Yes, the G box and the Apache text are slightly off center. I think the
box is lined up with the Apache text and the left side of the R in
geronimo and the left part of the M. If you guys like, we can move it
(and the Apache text slightly to the right) to make this look more
I tried updating and building the specs module just now. I get the
error below. This looks the same as I got last weekend, but I thought
people were working on it. I've made no changes at all to the specs
checkout or my Maven 2 installation. What am I supposed to do to get
this to work? Off
Noted - we will send it Monday. Or should we post it somewhere?
http://www.epiqtech.com/corp/products/technology/opensource/images/design7_500x404_large.gif
Glenn
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
It would be cool if we could get the logo as a layered photoshop
original. This will enable us to work
Sachin Patel wrote:
Yeah, that does look better.
Looking at them side by side, something was bothering me about the
squeezed one, but I think I've figured it out. We need to lop off the
bottom of the point so that it's flat like the original.
See:
I like this version of 'M' better. What do you
think about the shorter middle line of 'E'?
thanks
Anita
--- Erin Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sachin Patel wrote:
Yeah, that does look better.
Looking at them side by side, something was
bothering me about the
squeezed one, but I
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-839?page=all ]
Aaron Mulder resolved GERONIMO-839:
---
Resolution: Fixed
Require flag to provide config list on server startup, handle bogus arguments
I would see the mininum as the ideal solution and the other as a
less preferrable.
Assuming that somebody starts with using Jetty and then finding that
Tomcat would have been the bettter choice it would be easier just to
change the configuration than to perform a complete re-install.
Just as a
28 matches
Mail list logo
