You aren't paying attention to what I said. Only openejb uses g
bits in it, the others can all be built with no g parts present.
So, if I change something in g, I know I didn't break anything
except maybe openejb. So, I want to be able to check really easily
by having one build that incl
On Jun 30, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
It's very good, but it doesn't help with my desire to be able to
build g + all the stuff that depends on g that goes into g in one
step. since this isn't possible right now entirely in m2 anyway
due to the plugin issues I think I'll have to
It's very good, but it doesn't help with my desire to be able to
build g + all the stuff that depends on g that goes into g in one
step. since this isn't possible right now entirely in m2 anyway
due to the plugin issues I think I'll have to be satisfied with a
script that runs m2 in severa
We should remove the openejb/modules from the G root pom.xml.
Once some of the other issues are sorted I can put together an all-in-
one-special-build for those folks that want to build openejb+tranql+G
all at once.
--jason
On Jun 30, 2006, at 3:09 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Ok, Jason and I
On Jun 30, 2006, at 3:09 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Ok, Jason and I got it working on gbuild. Jars are pushed to
codehaus via webdav *and* I up'ed the frequency to every half
hour. So...
Current openejb jars *will* be available with in (0-30 min + build
time) of any commit to openejb.
Ok, Jason and I got it working on gbuild. Jars are pushed to
codehaus via webdav *and* I up'ed the frequency to every half hour.
So...
Current openejb jars *will* be available with in (0-30 min + build
time) of any commit to openejb.
Does that seem reasonable to everyone? David Jencks
Oh, sorry... What version of openejb did you just deploy to the
codehaus dist repo?
--jason
On Jun 30, 2006, at 12:07 PM, David Blevins wrote:
The latest version? Sorry i didn't get what you mean :)
-David
On Jun 30, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
What is the version that we sh
The latest version? Sorry i didn't get what you mean :)
-David
On Jun 30, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
What is the version that we should be using?
--jason
On Jun 30, 2006, at 11:14 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Built and published the latest jars from my mac.
For reference it's si
What is the version that we should be using?
--jason
On Jun 30, 2006, at 11:14 AM, David Blevins wrote:
Built and published the latest jars from my mac.
For reference it's simply: Finder -> Go -> Connect to Server
Use "https://dav.codehaus.org/dist/openejb/"; for the Server
Address. Good
I think it supposed to... since this will give your writable access
to that share.
--jason
On Jun 30, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
The link tries to authenticate me :-(
Cheers
Prasad
On 6/30/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Built and published the latest jars from
The link tries to authenticate me :-(
Cheers
Prasad
On 6/30/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Built and published the latest jars from my mac.
For reference it's simply: Finder -> Go -> Connect to Server
Use "https://dav.codehaus.org/dist/openejb/"; for the Server Address.
Good ide
Built and published the latest jars from my mac.
For reference it's simply: Finder -> Go -> Connect to Server
Use "https://dav.codehaus.org/dist/openejb/"; for the Server Address.
Good idea to click the "+" button to add it to your favorites.
Anyway, working on getting a similar setup on gb
I was very uncomfortable w/ the proposed change.
Curious, how so?
* * *
Maybe later today we will have jars published... assuming that we
have wrangled the webdav config on the continuum box.
--jason
This is good news. I was very uncomfortable w/ the proposed change.
Regards,
Alan
Jason Dillon wrote:
FYI, I'm working with David Blevins now to try and get the OpenEJB
jars published... and once published then the defautl build will not
need these sources. But for folks that want to build
On 6/30/06, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't understand your reasoning. maven m:co checks out using https
and IIUC works for both committers and non-committers, and as a
committer I can use that checkout as my working openejb copy. What
is the advantage of preventing me from doi
On Jun 29, 2006, at 3:20 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 6/30/06, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note http rather than https.
I hope someone who actually knows will speak up, but I thought https
worked fine for non-committers whereas http did not work for
committers. If true I woul
Hi All,If we do http;svn ci from within the openejb tree (i.e geronimo/openejb) won't workif we do https;an openejb committer can edit the code in the openejb tree (within the geronimo tree) and do an svn ci and it would commit.in any event 'svn ci' from the root of the geronimo tree would ignore o
FYI, I'm working with David Blevins now to try and get the OpenEJB
jars published... and once published then the defautl build will not
need these sources. But for folks that want to build G and OpenEJB
in one swoop we can setup a super-build that does this.
But, right now still working on
On 6/30/06, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note http rather than https.
I hope someone who actually knows will speak up, but I thought https
worked fine for non-committers whereas http did not work for
committers. If true I would suggest https rather than http.
AFAIUI, you won't b
On Jun 29, 2006, at 3:02 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
Hi,
It's been said (http://www.nabble.com/M2-Issues-and-Actions-
tf1867589.html)
that svn:externals would help us working around the following issue:
3. openejb - The openejb build should use geronimo jars that come from
o.a.g groupId. Hen
Hi,
It's been said (http://www.nabble.com/M2-Issues-and-Actions-tf1867589.html)
that svn:externals would help us working around the following issue:
3. openejb - The openejb build should use geronimo jars that come from
o.a.g groupId. Hence it is necessary to build openejb. Until now v_2.1
was u
21 matches
Mail list logo
