Le jeu. 2 août 2018 22:35, Łukasz Dywicki a écrit :
> I don't see any new developments started with xbean, but there are still
> projects under active development which rely on it. ActiveMQ 5.x might be
> last one, not sure about others, and it does suffer because no investments
> in xbean. JAXB
I don't see any new developments started with xbean, but there are still
projects under active development which rely on it. ActiveMQ 5.x might be last
one, not sure about others, and it does suffer because no investments in xbean.
JAXB is fine, but I doubt if any custom type mapping will be eve
Sadly not only updates to blueprint are necessary. Currently ActoveMQ shades
and does not re-export xbean-spring packages. Embedding is done in order to get
ActiveMQ working with Spring 4.
This prevents others from adding additional namespace handlers with custom
elements.
To solve this in prop
Hi Lukasz,
As mentionned on IRC i'd just make the current blueprint module working
(and avoid to create a blueprint-cm) module and I think it is ok to stay on
xbean 4 in terms of versioning since this is for a single consumer
(compared to other parts of the project). Now more technically ensure to
Over the last years, I have hardly seen anyone using the xbean-spring stuff
anymore. I think most of custom namespaces have been implemented using
JAXB instead.
I think one of the problem is that the xml tends to be ugly, so starting
from the xml and using JAXB usually makes more sense.
I guess if
Ladies and gentlemen,
I started messing around XBean as its codebase is in moderate form. I’ve run
into multiple issues while trying to get it running under Karaf 4.1 together
with ActiveMQ and decided to push it forward. I spent last couple of days
cleaning up duplicated code and refactoring ma
rmannibucau commented on a change in pull request #1: jdk9+ compilation
URL: https://github.com/apache/geronimo-openapi/pull/1#discussion_r205850019
##
File path: pom.xml
##
@@ -169,6 +170,13 @@
true
+
+javax.activation
+javax.activa
diuis closed pull request #2: fix for the empty ref attribute of RequestBody
annotation
URL: https://github.com/apache/geronimo-openapi/pull/2
This is a PR merged from a forked repository.
As GitHub hides the original diff on merge, it is displayed below for
the sake of provenance:
As th
diuis commented on issue #2: fix for the empty ref attribute of RequestBody
annotation
URL: https://github.com/apache/geronimo-openapi/pull/2#issuecomment-409866560
Hi @rmannibucau , your abd695bed67d082146148c55b5a295749f113afa commit fixed
the RequestBody empty ref bug:
```
if (!re
