[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-498?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ashish Jain closed GERONIMODEVTOOLS-498.
Resolution: Invalid
This feature is available from GEP V2.1.3.
How to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4179?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ashish Jain closed GERONIMO-4179.
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
Unable to proceed with this tutorial since the plugin installer fails
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-363?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ashish Jain updated GERONIMODEVTOOLS-363:
-
Attachment: GeronimoDevtools-363_updated.patch
updated patch please
Geronimo Revision: 703929 built with tests included
See the full build-0300.log file at
http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20081013/build-0300.log
See the unit test reports at
http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/trunk/20081013/unit-test
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4343?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12639047#action_12639047
]
ant elder commented on GERONIMO-4343:
-
Turns out there are some issues with that
Hi David,
Thank you for the response. It was very helpful.
Comments inline
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:47 PM, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 10, 2008, at 5:17 AM, Manu George wrote:
Hi David,
Thanks for replying. I have put a few
That should have been fixed back on Oct. 9 in r703291 by Jay.
-Donald
Ivan wrote:
Just find in the newest snapshot, after I manually install the dojo
plugin, it has an extra folder dojo, currently when we want the refer
to dojo.js, the url will be /dojo/dojo/dojo/dojo.js.
I suggest to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4352?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Rick McGuire reassigned GERONIMO-4352:
--
Assignee: Rick McGuire
IMAP provider: accessing parts of a multipart/mixed message
I too agree that a new user should not need to deal with plugins
initially unless they really want to.
I think they can already do this today ... but perhaps not as cleanly as
we would like (and not without the user seeing the word plugin).
The important thing (as David mentioned) is that
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
http://people.apache.org/~gawor/staging-repo/specs/geronimo-saaj_1.3_spec/
Staging site:
+1
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
Here's my +1.
Jarek
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4352?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Rick McGuire updated GERONIMO-4352:
---
Attachment: GERONIMO-4352.diff
Andreas, the attached patch passes the tests I've managed
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4354?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12639083#action_12639083
]
Pierre-Antoine Berreur commented on GERONIMO-4354:
--
My java version:
Missing dependency: org.apache.geronimo.framework/geronimo-common/2.1.1/jar
when starting Geronimo 2.1.1 on Solaris 10 x86
--
Key: GERONIMO-4354
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4354?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12639087#action_12639087
]
Jarek Gawor commented on GERONIMO-4354:
---
Did you download the zip or .tar.gz file?
Doh! You did mention this issue to me before and I totally forgot. Now
I'm not sure what to do. Maybe we could release the artifacts without
the site?
Jarek
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are some issues with the maven generated site. These aren't new
+1. IMO, site generation problems shouldn't hold-up the release.
-Donald
Jarek Gawor wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
Doesn't seem worth holding up the release, given the problem existed before.
-Donald
Joe Bohn wrote:
There are some issues with the maven generated site. These aren't new
problems and they are doc related ... so I'm not sure if they should
really hinder the spec release.
I just started
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4354?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12639098#action_12639098
]
Pierre-Antoine Berreur commented on GERONIMO-4354:
--
Thanks for your
I'd like to see us generate a source + prebuilt artifacts (WAR/EAR +
deployment plans) as a downloadable assembly off our Downloads page.
Requiring users to checkout the Samples source from SVN is not friendly
to those that don't have a svn client installed (Windows and some
default Linux
I agree. It would be nice if we can provide users a downlodable
sample bundle, which contains the prebuilt artifacts and their plans.
This would save users from learning svn, maven and digging around for
the plans.
Lin
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Donald Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are some issues with the maven generated site. These aren't new
problems and they are doc related ... so I'm not sure if they should
really hinder the spec release.
I just started looking into them since I had some of the same problems
with the recent samples 2.1.2 release (BTW ... not
NP ... when you mentioned you might be releasing saaj I just thought it
might be a good time to try to get this cleaned up too. Since we've
been releasing effectively without sites (or broken sites) for some time
now I don't think it should hinder the vote. I just thought I'd mention
the
On Oct 13, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Lin Sun wrote:
I agree. It would be nice if we can provide users a downlodable
sample bundle, which contains the prebuilt artifacts and their plans.
This would save users from learning svn, maven and digging around for
the plans.
This seems like a reasonable
Sorry...sent to the wrong thread accidentally. ;-(
Lin
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Lin Sun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
Lin
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are some issues with the maven generated site. These aren't new
problems and they are
+1
Lin
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
+1
Lin
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are some issues with the maven generated site. These aren't new
problems and they are doc related ... so I'm not sure if they should
really hinder the spec release.
I just started looking into them since I had
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4354?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12639116#action_12639116
]
Jarek Gawor commented on GERONIMO-4354:
---
What does tar --version return? It should
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4249?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
David Jencks updated GERONIMO-4249:
---
Attachment: jetty-6-to-7-v2.patch
Updated jetty6 to jetty7 patch.
Integrate jetty7
I just updated my jetty7 integration in the sandbox and committed some
minor changes in the trunk build to make it easier to switch between
jetty6 and jetty7 in rev 704183. I introduced a new property
jettyjetty6/jetty
that can be switched to jetty7 and used it in all the poms as a
+1
Jarek Gawor wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
http://people.apache.org/~gawor/staging-repo/specs/geronimo-saaj_1.3_spec/
Staging site:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4352?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12639155#action_12639155
]
Andreas Veithen commented on GERONIMO-4352:
---
I think that the patch causes a
Ivan,
Have you had a chance to try a newer snapshot?
Is Dojo showing up in the correct location for you?
Jay
Ivan wrote:
Just find in the newest snapshot, after I manually install the dojo plugin,
it has an extra folder dojo, currently when we want the refer to dojo.js,
the url will be
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:55 PM, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 8, 2008, at 1:55 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Jason Warner wrote:
Thanks for the explanation, David. I don't disagree with anything you've
explained, but I'm not sure you've addressed my concern about the disparity
in
It seems that a number of the commands stopped working on the framework
assembly sometime between the release of 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. The problem
persists in 2.1.3, branches/2.1, and trunk.
These are problems using the shell/batch commands. I know we want to
move over completely to gshell ...
+1 assuming we're still OK with TCK.
Joe
Jarek Gawor wrote:
Hi,
This is a vote for SAAJ 1.3 spec jar version 1.0.1. There was only one
change from version 1.0.0:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4289
Staging repo:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One more question: Has any tck validation been performed for this updated
spec?
Yes. Geronimo trunk was updated to use the SNAPSHOT of the spec with
the fix and so TCK was/is running with it.
Jarek
Comments inline:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that a number of the commands stopped working on the framework
assembly sometime between the release of 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. The problem
persists in 2.1.3, branches/2.1, and trunk.
These are problems
Greg and Jan were kind enough to create a branch for me to play around
with a JASPI (Java Authentication Service Provider Interface)
integration with jetty and its getting to a point where I'm willing to
talk about it.
Code is at https://svn.codehaus.org/jetty/jetty/branches/jetty-7-jaspi
After running mvn install on my local svn folder, I checked the file
dojo-tomcat-2.2-SNAPSHOT.car in the target folder, it has the same structure
with the previous one.
---dojo---dojo
---dijit
---WEB-INF
---MENTA-INF
Adding the web context dojo, I guess we still need
41 matches
Mail list logo
