Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20
For later reference, a related further change was made via
b3a66b741c34b40b059fc023b3c7650720dfc001 to apply the optimisation in more
cases
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20
I've pushed an updated version of the change with a fix for the offset
issue I noticed yesterday, which Tim added a test to cover
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20#discussion_r234714952
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/codec/CompositeReadableBuffer.java
---
@@ -834,22 +834,39 @@ public boolean equals(Object
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20
Can you unwind the 'revert' of my currentPos -> origPos variable name
change from earlier? :)
---
-
To unsubscribe
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20
Checked in with infra who looked into it and found the issue, mirror is now
back up to date.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20
It seems the github mirror is not up to date, and I've since prodded a
re-sync and it still isn't up to date. I'll possibly need to ask infra about it
after lunch
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/20
The reset is a good catch. Its a noteworthy bug in its own right and so
should be fixed separately, and also tested. I have done that now via
PROTON-1966. Sorry for the hassle @franz1981
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/25
Sorry, I didn't notice you raised this. I had the change sitting ready
since preparing 0.30.0 last week, awaiting the vote and then completing the
announcement work. It never occurred to me anyone
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/19
Can you please close out this PR? I went with a different approach,
committed in 83609c4752fbdaa1ddfa032285e5caa09b61f480, of making each reactor
timer maintain a counter for its tasks
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/15
We don't get notified of updated pushes for the mirrors, so I didn't know
you had modified this since my comment
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/18#discussion_r231104760
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/message/impl/MessageImpl.java ---
@@ -49,11 +49,7
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/16
As noted on the JIRA, an alternate change was made in
19bf22f7e9b88e73db4b195f674d1527dbd713f3.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/18
If the changes aren't related enough to be in the same commit, they
probably shouldn't be in the same PR to begin with :)
(My view is that nothing but the most complex layered changes
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/18#discussion_r225562577
--- Diff:
examples/reactor/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/example/reactor/EchoInputStreamWrapper.java
---
@@ -31,11 +31,12
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/19
I'll merge this later, could perhaps do with a test.
Note that the example change should really have been kept separate as it
has nothing to do with the defect (and as noted before
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/18#discussion_r225224724
--- Diff:
examples/reactor/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/example/reactor/EchoInputStreamWrapper.java
---
@@ -31,11 +31,12
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/18#discussion_r225236948
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/reactor/impl/TaskImpl.java ---
@@ -29,10 +29,12 @@
import
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/18#discussion_r225223601
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/engine/impl/ssl/DefaultSslEngineFacade.java
---
@@ -36,7 +36,7
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/22
Can you elaborate on the benefits you measured here? I'd like to understand
the extent to consider against the downside of exposing dep impl types
throughout the code base.
The existing
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/15
The JIRA, PR, and commit say they are primarily changing the benchmark/test
but most of the change has nothing to do with that. Even though the perf change
is tiny and most things wont see
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/14
After some investigation and testing, a different approach
(https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/commit/7eac8b945c8ce90f091126d34cf174e8792fdfc0)
for improvement was taken as discussed
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/133
I meant the PR probably doesnt make sense, i.e we wouldnt have a branch
here, which it seems you agree
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/133
I don't think we have ability to configure periodic builds in Travis on
this mirror, over which we have limited control in which case this doesn't
really make sense
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/20
That wont actually work since the epoll bits are required by default, as
the classes are used by default, in determining whether the functionality is
currently available
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/20
> FYI, attempting to exclude the transitive dependency on the kqueue jar so
only the epoll jar is available in the bundle does not fix the problem, the
OSGI container again complains ab
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/20
I agree the Travis CI OSX failure is unrelated. There isn't a way to
trigger a new build on the github mirror without updating the PR.
I don't think this change is actually quite the way
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/142
It seems you already committed this before Gordon and I commented, but
neglected to close the PR with the commit or otherwise. It either needs
closing, or the commit reverted, depending what
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/142
> Thanks - I didn't know about stolen. I think we could implement what the
spec says on the server side - close the old link/handle with "stolen" and
create a new link under t
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/142
The use of "invalid-field" for the error feels like it is maybe a little
off. Its possible/likely there is nothing wrong with the information in the
fields of the attac
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-cpp/pull/12
Docs, removing 'untested proton version' warning, etc, changes look good to
me. I'll trust Gordon about the code
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/140
I gave things a skim over, changes seemed reasonable from my
doesnt-do-cmake-etc perspective.
Noting for later reference: this builds on / incorporates WIP from #136 and
#138
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/252
Couple of questions.
Probably a thing to consider even with the existing config method, but how
are routes treated when more than one connection says it matches something
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/13
For completeness, a different change was made via
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-1736 in commit
17cef9ace9a7c75901d517f951ae1d4610819436
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/13
My immediate reaction is that this isn't acceptable. It exposes various
APIs that are considered part of the implementation only, and then further
exposes additional implementation detail
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/12
Hi Franz
Thanks for the PR. I have some feedback for changes that would be good
and/or necessary.
The JMH dependencies are not ALv2 compatible and so I think we should make
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/129
@astitcher seems to have made various changes related to these ones in
commits such as:
d82bbfab037c97e1c403ae701f1b3fe272813ff7 ,
b6ad8a996faa34aeb8e475902a6f151c5476d45f
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/128
I agree on reducing the number of builds. The /apache org has a shared job
capacity for all the foundations projects, so we dont want to be overloading
things, and tripling the number just
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/212
@ganeshmurthy looks good
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-cpp/pull/8
@chrisrichardson77 A change for this looks to have been made in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=qpid-cpp.git;h=55d4171, can you close
the PR please?
(The commit log message
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-cpp/pull/7
@chrisrichardson77 A change for this looks to have been made in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=qpid-cpp.git;a=commitdiff;h=edccbc9e1737603a1d1f66f0df8499dbba07e93b,
can you close the PR
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-cpp/pull/6
@chrisrichardson77 A change for this looks to have been made in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=qpid-cpp.git;a=commitdiff;h=a8d392efe30ef763d2e93c6ce733976ac786c0f0,
can you close the PR
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-cpp/pull/4
@kgiusti Can you close the PR? This looks to have been applied in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=qpid-cpp.git;h=f91a23c
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/10
Can you please squash the changes into a single commit and make the commit
message a little more specific, e.g "PROTON-1551: fix length encoding for
binary over 255 bytes in length when
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/12
> Agreed its not ideal we have to do this, but this was found on epoll in
artemis (which you already have epoll implemented and defaulted to true) , as
such until netty improve the ch
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/12
I don't think the various environment etc checking being done really
belongs in the client, it seems like that stuff belongs in Netty if the
isAvailable() checks it offers aren't actually
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/190
Tested the latest version and the attach target is now null as needed to
indicate refusal, and the updated error details look good.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128809457
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/test/testpeer/TestAmqpPeer.java
---
@@ -495,6 +512,169 @@ public void run
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128810019
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/provider/amqp/AmqpSaslAuthenticator.java
---
@@ -137,7 +142,9 @@ private void handleSaslStep
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128807526
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/sasl/GssapiMechanism.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128808271
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/sasl/GssapiMechanism.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128755403
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/integration/SaslGssApiIntegrationTest.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,185
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128747741
--- Diff: qpid-jms-client/src/main/resources/login.config ---
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128750540
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/test/testpeer/TestAmqpPeer.java
---
@@ -495,6 +512,169 @@ public void run
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128754495
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/test/testpeer/TestAmqpPeer.java
---
@@ -495,6 +512,169 @@ public void run
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128754756
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/integration/SaslGssApiIntegrationTest.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,185
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128754720
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/integration/SaslGssApiIntegrationTest.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,185
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128749340
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/test/testpeer/TestAmqpPeer.java
---
@@ -495,6 +512,169 @@ public void run
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128727012
--- Diff: qpid-jms-client/pom.xml ---
@@ -93,6 +93,19 @@
hamcrest-all
test
+
+ org.apache.hadoop
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128752547
--- Diff: qpid-jms-client/src/test/resources/minikdc-krb5.conf ---
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+#
+# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128726699
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/provider/amqp/AmqpSaslAuthenticator.java
---
@@ -137,7 +142,9 @@ private void handleSaslStep
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128749066
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/test/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/integration/SaslIntegrationTest.java
---
@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@
private static final
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128748789
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/sasl/GssapiMechanism.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/10#discussion_r128747005
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/sasl/GssapiMechanism.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/9
Looks good. I gave things a try with the changes from PROTON-1486 (now
pushed) against Dispatch and the C++ broker, which continue to send the
explicit challange before the outcome rather than use
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7
Hi Austin,
I've squashed your chagnes into a single commit
(https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/commit/72c7bb0880b5cc7dd332c0220091f93d0de9a5a2)
and put it in along with further commit
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7#discussion_r116052679
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7#discussion_r116064745
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Server.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7#discussion_r116048356
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7#discussion_r116053494
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7#discussion_r116057472
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/7#discussion_r116069936
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Server.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115542360
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Server.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115541734
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Server.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115540310
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Server.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115537587
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+
+package org.apache.qpid.jms.example
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115537215
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+
--- End diff --
This new file
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115538757
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+
+package org.apache.qpid.jms.example
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115539336
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Client.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+
+package org.apache.qpid.jms.example
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6#discussion_r115540862
--- Diff:
qpid-jms-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/jms/example/Server.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+/*
+ *
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-jms/pull/6
Hi Austin,
I think this is a good start. There are some changes that I think would
improve the new example classes, in general I think the classes would benefit
from some simplification
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/102
Looks like the change was applied, but was no longer the head commit at the
time, and didn't have "This closes #102" in the message of the commit itself or
a merge commit. Can
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/8
Did you raise this in error? If so please close it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/7
I've pushed a change to expose the currently available bytes length. I went
with 'available()' since it felt natural for what its indicating, and applying
to both send/recv cases. In hindsight
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/6
I'm aware of what qpid-jms does, it does that while avoiding using the
Message[Impl] from proton entirely, meaning it isn't using the thread local
from there either, but just happens to have
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/6
Can you elaborate a little on what you are doing to need this? Are you just
subclassing the MessageImpl? If so would protected getter(s) work for you?
Creating a separate new 'non impl
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/7
The javadoc could do with making a little clearer that it returns the
currently unread length of the existing payload for the delivery, and is not
the length of the delivery (which might
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/4
Actually, if you could also confirm if its just working for you that would
be good too, as I can then look to kick off the release process on 0.18.0 some
time, perhaps next week.
---
If your
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/4
I've pushed an updated set of changes, to address some of my earlier
feedback and some issues with the subsequent commit. Give things a try out on
master and comment here or on PROTON-1405
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/4
I've had a look and have some comments:
- The changes should inclulde some tests for the new feature.
- The setter javadoc should make clear that this overrides any other
configuration
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/2
I've raised #3 with some alternative changes, which are essentially just a
subset of yours with a different test. One of the changes here would corrupt
the linkPrev/next entries chain, which
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/3
PROTON-1393: fully sever delivery refs during removal
Fully sever delivery references for related 'lists' during removal to
prevent unexpected retention of old deliveries that arent otherwise
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/2
I've had a closer look at this now, sorry it took so long. I'm not sure
about some of the changes, I'm going to give it a furhter look tomorrow to
either establish I'm wrong, or suggest some
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-java/pull/1
Aligns to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7468
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton-j/pull/1
I am in a F2F meeting (or travelling to/from it) all this week so I
probably won't get a chance to look closely until next week, but I took a skim
of this.
I can see from the changes
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/89
I hadn't realised you had done separate commits...can you add the relevant
JIRA key to the first commit, then squash the other two together as a single
commit and give it the other key
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/89
Including a message as to why the IAE is thrown wouldn't go amiss :)
I think you missed my comment about raising a separate JIRA for the
unrelated annotations change, then including its
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/89#discussion_r88262982
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/amqp/transport/ReceiverSettleMode.java
---
@@ -25,13 +25,32 @@
import
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/89#discussion_r88259929
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/amqp/transport/ReceiverSettleMode.java
---
@@ -25,13 +25,32 @@
import
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/89#discussion_r88247744
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/amqp/transport/ReceiverSettleMode.java
---
@@ -25,13 +25,32 @@
import
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/89#discussion_r88248771
--- Diff:
proton-j/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/proton/amqp/transport/SenderSettleMode.java
---
@@ -25,13 +25,33 @@
import
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
