Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

On Jul 22, 2008, at 9:45 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: OK. The vote for the 2.0.8 release is up: http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Release-CXF-2.0.8-td18602257.html Hopefully I can find some time this weekend to finish the vote and get it synced to central. (assuming the vote passes) Great. Thanks

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 678964

Geronimo Revision: 678964 built with tests included See the full build-2100.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/build-2100.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/unit-test

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

OK. The vote for the 2.0.8 release is up: http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Release-CXF-2.0.8-td18602257.html Hopefully I can find some time this weekend to finish the vote and get it synced to central. (assuming the vote passes) Dan On Jul 22, 2008, at 3:24 PM, Joe Bohn wrote: Hi Dan, Fi

[jira] Commented: (GERONIMODEVTOOLS-231) Allow runtimes to be named

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12615852#action_12615852 ] Ted Kirby commented on GERONIMODEVTOOLS-231: Yes, this does seem to w

[jira] Resolved: (GERONIMODEVTOOLS-416) Add click-through license screen to Download and Install path

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Ted Kirby resolved GERONIMODEVTOOLS-416. Resolution: Fixed Assignee: Ted Kirby (was: Tim McConnell) fixed w

openid and jaspi

Someone pointed out openid to me http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0.html and I thought I'd see about making a jaspi module to implement it in the jaspi implementation I've been working on in components. https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/jaspi/trunk I'm usin

[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-4207) Provide a LoginModule which can be used to add user or group principals via configuration

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12615779#action_12615779 ] Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-4207: Can this now be marked as delivered in 2.1.2?

[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-4082) ignored for certain classes that are loaded by system class loader

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4082?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12615774#action_12615774 ] Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-4082: Is there any remaining work for this or can we

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Hi Dan, First, thanks again for your help with this! I think you can go ahead and start the CXF 2.0.8 release process. I've still got some more tests to go ... but so far things are looking good and most of the tests have completed. If we do happen to find a problem we'll discover it soon.

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Just FYI: once we get validation that the snapshots fix the tck problems, I'm ready to roll the CXF 2.0.8 release. I just need the go-ahead signal. Dan On Jul 22, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Joe Bohn wrote: The issue with the tck tests ended up being a bug in cxf 2.0.6. CXF has a fix tha

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Joe Bohn wrote: Jason Warner wrote: I'm inclined to agree also, but I'm wondering how long of a delay we'd be looking at. A weekish? It will probably be close to a week from our original target which was yesterday. If everything works like clockwork we could branch as soon as Friday. Joe

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Donald Woods wrote: Well, we are using 6.0.16, but there has been one patch since then -Donald Right. But that fix is for the Host Manager application and IIUC we don't ship that app with Geronimo. I think we're ok with the tomcat image we currently have included. Joe Donald Woo

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Well, we are using 6.0.16, but there has been one patch since then -Donald Donald Woods wrote: Do we need to consider upgrading to Tomcat 6.0.16+ before we release, given there have been 6 security fixes since the 6.0.14 release we are using? http://tomcat.apache.org/security-6.html -

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Do we need to consider upgrading to Tomcat 6.0.16+ before we release, given there have been 6 security fixes since the 6.0.14 release we are using? http://tomcat.apache.org/security-6.html -Donald Joe Bohn wrote: I know it's a little bit more than the usual 24 hours but since a weekend i

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

Jason Warner wrote: I'm inclined to agree also, but I'm wondering how long of a delay we'd be looking at. A weekish? It will probably be close to a week from our original target which was yesterday. If everything works like clockwork we could branch as soon as Friday. Joe On Tue, Jul 2

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

I'm inclined to agree also, but I'm wondering how long of a delay we'd be looking at. A weekish? On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Joe Bohn wrote: > > >> The issue with the tck tests ended up being a bug in cxf 2.0.6. CXF

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

On Jul 22, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Joe Bohn wrote: The issue with the tck tests ended up being a bug in cxf 2.0.6. CXF has a fix that is currently included in 2.0.8-SNAPSHOT. If we give them the green light they will push a release soon. At this point I'm trying to decide the best course of

Re: branches/2.1 - 72 hour notice for 2.1.2 release processing

The issue with the tck tests ended up being a bug in cxf 2.0.6. CXF has a fix that is currently included in 2.0.8-SNAPSHOT. If we give them the green light they will push a release soon. At this point I'm trying to decide the best course of action. If you have an opinion please speak up:

java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException when building daytrader sample on trunk

Encountered a problem when building daytrader sample on trunk, here is the error msg. Anyone know how to fix it? thanks! [ERROR] The protocol for the JAR file's URL is not supported java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Only local file jars are supported jar: file:/D:/Job/WASCE/tools/repos/org

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 678752

Geronimo Revision: 678752 built with tests included See the full build-0900.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/build-0900.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/unit-test

Re: [BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 678659

ries/trunk/20080722/build-0300.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/unit-test-reports [INFO] [car:prepare-metadata] [INFO] [car:archive-car] [INFO] Building jar: /home/geronimo/geronimo/trunk/plugins/console/plugin-console-je

[jira] Updated: (GERONIMO-4025) Accessibility issues: No caption tag or summary property, no column and row scope property for data tables in admin console

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4025?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Rex Wang updated GERONIMO-4025: --- Attachment: GERONIMO-4025-console.patch The GERONIMO-4025-console.patch is the last one for this j

[BUILD] trunk: Failed for Revision: 678659

Geronimo Revision: 678659 built with tests included See the full build-0300.log file at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/build-0300.log See the unit test reports at http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20080722/unit-test