AsyncHttpClient was changed w/ the last checkin on 2/26 and now the
build is broken.
Regards,
Alan
I noticed this too... Incidentally I also noticed that the SSL unit tests
were broken due to the way that the SSL filter is added but that seems to be
an old issue. The SSL filter should be added before the protocol codec
filter...
Shall I file a bug and submit a patch for both?
Thanks,
Sangjin
Sangjin Lee wrote:
> I noticed this too... Incidentally I also noticed that the SSL unit tests
> were broken due to the way that the SSL filter is added but that seems to be
> an old issue. The SSL filter should be added before the protocol codec
> filter...
> Shall I file a bug and submit a pa
Not yet... I haven't got an account setup confirmation from ASF...
Regards,
Sangjin
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Sangjin Lee wrote:
> > I noticed this too... Incidentally I also noticed that the SSL unit
> tests
> > were broken due to the way t
Hmmm...that is something that should not take long...
We need to get this handled ASAP. Alex...any thoughts?
Jeff
Sangjin Lee wrote:
> Not yet... I haven't got an account setup confirmation from ASF...
> Regards,
> Sangjin
>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I think Trustin sent the request. Sometimes a bunch of them get processed
on Wednesdays by Joes. So it's got to be in the queue. If not we can has
him on infra what the status is.
Alex
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmmm...that is something that sho
Jeff Genender wrote:
Hmmm...that is something that should not take long...
We need to get this handled ASAP. Alex...any thoughts?
This usually take a week, sometime more.
The account creation request has been sent on feb, 25th.
Be patient ;)
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
Alex Karasulu wrote:
I think Trustin sent the request.
He did, on feb, 25th...
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
Uh oh. A naughty committer committed w/out passing the unit tests...
On Mar 3, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
I noticed this too... Incidentally I also noticed that the SSL unit
tests
were broken due to the way that the SSL filter is added but that
seems to be
an old issue. The SS
On Mar 1, 2008, at 8:12 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
AsyncHttpClient was changed w/ the last checkin on 2/26 and now the
build is broken.
I looked at the actual changes. I'm just trying to grok the changes
because I realize that I am new here. It seems that the "old"
AsyncHttpClient is s
I agree with Alan...I understood that the G version was going away now
that we built community over here on this. Comments?
Jeff
Alan Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Mar 1, 2008, at 8:12 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> AsyncHttpClient was changed w/ the last checkin on 2/26 and now the
>> build is broke
I am in agreement as well. I would like to see this merge happen quickly so
the users see progress and there's no longer any need to keep the G branch
alive. Someone said to me you need to get cookin in the kitchen when the
guests arrive :). Then we can just start releasing some milestones that
I would also like to see asyncweb make progress as quickly as possible, and
I'd like to contribute to that effect as well. As Mike pointed out in a
different thread, however, there are some challenges to this. It's looking
more likely that this is not going to be a simple "merge" of code but
subs
Sangjin Lee wrote:
> I would also like to see asyncweb make progress as quickly as possible, and
> I'd like to contribute to that effect as well. As Mike pointed out in a
> different thread, however, there are some challenges to this. It's looking
> more likely that this is not going to be a simp
That sounds like a good idea. Just so I understand, your proposal is to
move the existing AHC in the Geronimo sandbox based on mina 1.1.x over to
asyncweb under a branch and keep up the maintenance and support on it,
right?
Thanks,
Sangjin
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PROTE
Sangjin Lee wrote:
> That sounds like a good idea. Just so I understand, your proposal is to
> move the existing AHC in the Geronimo sandbox based on mina 1.1.x over to
> asyncweb under a branch and keep up the maintenance and support on it,
> right?
> Thanks,
> Sangjin
Yes, that's exactly what I
OK, thanks... I like the suggestion. +1 from me. :)
Sangjin
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sangjin Lee wrote:
> > That sounds like a good idea. Just so I understand, your proposal is to
> > move the existing AHC in the Geronimo sandbox based on mina 1.1
You might though want to use MINA 2.0 the move is not that big and it might
be the best option.
Alex
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Sangjin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, thanks... I like the suggestion. +1 from me. :)
> Sangjin
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Mike Heath <[EMAIL PRO
On Mar 4, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
Sangjin Lee wrote:
I would also like to see asyncweb make progress as quickly as
possible, and
I'd like to contribute to that effect as well. As Mike pointed out
in a
different thread, however, there are some challenges to this. It's
looking
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> This seems like a good idea. I have some questions.
>
> When we cut a release of this code, what version will it be? What will
> be its Maven group and artifact id?
>
> What about the other AsyncWeb client? It looks like people are
> modifying that quite heavily. Are
That might be a problem for us... We're about to use AHC (which is based on
mina 1.1.x) in a production environment. Switching to mina 2.0 now would
set us back in terms of invested time (testing, regression, etc.)... If at
all possible, it would be great if we could support the current AHC as i
This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you hanging
but we're really jumping head over heels to make one user comfortable. I
think we paved the road for you to be able to achieve what you need by
granting you karma to work directly on this code base. We're open but need
you
BTW, Sangjin, did you get any response from [EMAIL PROTECTED] for your new
account? If you didn't get one, please let me know.
2008-03-06 (목), 10:39 -0500, Alex Karasulu 쓰시길:
> This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you hanging
> but we're really jumping head over heels to
On Mar 5, 2008, at 9:03 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
This seems like a good idea. I have some questions.
When we cut a release of this code, what version will it be? What
will
be its Maven group and artifact id?
What about the other AsyncWeb client? It looks like peopl
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you hanging
> but we're really jumping head over heels to make one user comfortable. I
> think we paved the road for you to be able to achieve what you need by
> granting you karma to work directly on this code ba
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Mar 5, 2008, at 9:03 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
>
>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This seems like a good idea. I have some questions.
>>>
>>> When we cut a release of this code, what version will it be? What will
>>> be its Maven group and artifact id?
>>>
>>> What
On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Mike Heath wrote:
Alex Karasulu wrote:
This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you
hanging
but we're really jumping head over heels to make one user
comfortable. I
think we paved the road for you to be able to achieve what you need
by
g
On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Mike Heath wrote:
Alex Karasulu wrote:
This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you
hanging
but we're really jumping head over heels to make one user
comfortable. I
think we paved the
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Mike Heath wrote:
>
> > Alex Karasulu wrote:
> >> This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you
> >> hanging
> >> but we're really jumping head over heels to make one u
On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Mike Heath wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Mar 5, 2008, at 9:03 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
This seems like a good idea. I have some questions.
When we cut a release of this code, what version will it be? What
will
be its Maven group a
On Mar 18, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Alan D. Cabrera
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Mike Heath wrote:
Alex Karasulu wrote:
This is your specific situation right? I don't want to leave you
hanging
but we're really
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Mar 18, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Mike Heath wrote:
>
>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 5, 2008, at 9:03 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
>>>
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> This seems like a good idea. I have some questions.
>
> When we cut a release of t
I completely agree that the changes to the "1.0" release should be limited
to bug fixes.
Thanks,
Sangjin
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Mar 18, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Alan D. Cabrera
> >
33 matches
Mail list logo
