[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1873?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13561486#comment-13561486
]
angela commented on JCR-1873:
-
is it configured to be run on jenkins? not sure about that...
as
On 23.1.13 10:43, Jukka Zitting wrote:
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Jackrabbit 2.5.3
+1
Michael
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13561528#comment-13561528
]
Thomas Mueller commented on JCR-3493:
-
The patch looks good! There is one typo in the
Michael Dürig created JCR-3499:
--
Summary: Test cases should not rely on equality of node types
Key: JCR-3499
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3499
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3497?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig updated JCR-3497:
---
Assignee: Michael Dürig
Invalid path in SaveTest#testRepositoryException
Hi,
The current code assumes the index configuration nodes are under
/oak:index.
We discussed that index nodes could be local, where the content is, if the
index only applies to a subtree (is not repository-wide). But this would
make things more complicated in the index code: when updating the
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit 2.5.3.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at
least three +1 Jackrabbit PMC votes are cast.
[X] +1 Release this package as Apache Jackrabbit 2.5.3
Regards
Marcel
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3497?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig updated JCR-3497:
---
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
Fixed at revision 1437928.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig resolved JCR-3499.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 2.7
Assignee: Michael Dürig
Fixed at revision
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1873?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13561570#comment-13561570
]
Claus Köll commented on JCR-1873:
-
I think i will commit the patch as it is. If somebody
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1873?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Claus Köll updated JCR-1873:
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
Committed in revision 1437963.
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Jackrabbit-trunk (build #2040)
Status: Failure
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-trunk/2040/ to
view the results.
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Apache Jenkins Server
jenk...@builds.apache.org wrote:
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-trunk/2040/
to view the results.
The problem was:
[INFO] [clirr:check {execution: default}]
[ERROR]
Jukka Zitting created JCR-3500:
--
Summary: Upgrade to Tika 1.3
Key: JCR-3500
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3500
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
Issue Type: Improvement
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Randall Hauch updated JCR-3493:
---
Attachment: jcr-3493-tests-2.patch
Thanks, Thomas. I uploaded a new version of the patch.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13561684#comment-13561684
]
Thomas Mueller commented on JCR-3493:
-
Look good to me, thanks!
OUTER
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13561738#comment-13561738
]
David Buchmann commented on JCR-3279:
-
i realized that this is not a general problem but
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Jackrabbit-trunk (build #2041)
Status: Unstable
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-trunk/2041/ to
view the results.
On 24/gen/2013, at 10:59, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Hi,
The current code assumes the index configuration nodes are under
/oak:index.
Ok thanks for the clarification Thomas, that sounds good for now.
We discussed that index nodes could be local, where the content is, if the
index only
Hi,
A candidate for the Jackrabbit Oak 0.6 release is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jackrabbit/oak/0.6/
The release candidate is a zip archive of the sources in:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/oak/tags/jackrabbit-oak-0.6/
The SHA1 checksum of the
Hi,
BTW, when building the 0.6 release candidate, you need to also have
the Jackrabbit 2.5.3 release candidate locally installed.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder oak-trunk while building ASF
Buildbot.
Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/oak-trunk/builds/1400
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: osiris_ubuntu
Build Reason: scheduler
Build Source Stamp:
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 0.6.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at
least three +1 Jackrabbit PMC votes are cast.
[X] +1 Release this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 0.6
Regards
Marcel
Hmm again... ;-)
[INFO] Step 1. Check release cheksum
[ERROR] Release checksum does not match provided checksum!
I applied Barts fix to the oak release check script. Try again. It works
for me now.
Regards
Marcel
This is caused by the latest jcr-tests snapshot, which includes the fix
for JCR-3499 not being available to the buildbot. Isn't running the
Jenkins build for Jackrabbit enough to deploy these artefacts?
Michael
On 24.1.13 11:05, build...@apache.org wrote:
The Buildbot has detected a new
On 24.1.13 10:24, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 0.6.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at
least three +1 Jackrabbit PMC votes are cast.
[X] +1 Release this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 0.6
Michael
+1
Bart
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
A candidate for the Jackrabbit Oak 0.6 release is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jackrabbit/oak/0.6/
The release candidate is a zip archive of the sources in:
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Michael Dürig mdue...@apache.org wrote:
This is caused by the latest jcr-tests snapshot, which includes the fix for
JCR-3499 not being available to the buildbot. Isn't running the Jenkins
build for Jackrabbit enough to deploy these artefacts?
I suspect
On 24.1.13 12:10, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Michael Dürig mdue...@apache.org wrote:
This is caused by the latest jcr-tests snapshot, which includes the fix for
JCR-3499 not being available to the buildbot. Isn't running the Jenkins
build for Jackrabbit enough
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:11 AM, angela (JIRA) j...@apache.org wrote:
since query is used to retrieve to used retrieve ac content by
principal, the ac impl should define an property index for the
rep:principalName defined by rep:ACE node type.
Is it essential for the access control code
Hi,
Yes, I would also try to avoid using a query to read the ACLs from the
content tree (for multiple reasons: to avoid maintaining indexes, to speed
up access, to simplify caching).
Regards,
Thomas
On 1/24/13 2:22 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at
Hi,
Ah OK. Then the only solution to avoid those indexes is to not support the
feature I guess.
Regards,
Thomas
On 1/24/13 2:27 PM, Angela Schreiber anch...@adobe.com wrote:
hi jukka
it's not for the access control evaluation nor for access
by path that the query is used... is for the
There's OAK-436 and OAK-504 already.
Michael
On 24.1.13 13:34, ang...@apache.org wrote:
Author: angela
Date: Thu Jan 24 13:34:49 2013
New Revision: 1437993
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1437993view=rev
Log:
ignore failing test. i will open an issue for that
Modified:
hi devs
i recently came across quite some new oak code that has
already been marked deprecated... for example the old
index implementations.
would it be possible to get rid of those deprecated classes
and methods? since OAK is a completely new repository
implementation i don't see why we should
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Angela Schreiber anch...@adobe.com wrote:
it's not for the access control evaluation nor for access
by path that the query is used... is for the jackrabbit api
extensions that retrieve access control content by principal.
Ah, I see, thanks!
I used to
35 matches
Mail list logo
