Re: [Discuss] Review-than-commit 3 month trial

Hi MarkThis is only for fixing the appeared (very important) problem in the community. So, I don't see what will happen to the project in 3 months period with RTC process? So, at least 3 months, every commit will be approved by the community via consensus. After that, we can safely return back

Re: Site NG on github

Romain, For the site generation, if you want to switch to gitwcsub (and dump the SVN repo) its simply a matter of having a job (buildbot or jenkins) that will build the commit and push the result to a special branch (most are using asf-site). Since you're already using mvn to generate the site,

Re: [Discuss] Review-than-commit 3 month trial

RTC in my experience _only_ works on release branches, but is a total community killer on the mainstream branch (master, dev, whatever you call it). We usually don't have so many concurrent commits on the same topic. There was recently an exceptional case and it got resolved. Thus -1 Of

Re: Site NG on github

should have all the needed content now, mvn compile to generate the site mvn pre-site to publish it on staging Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github

Re: [Discuss] Review-than-commit 3 month trial

Hi David Thanks for your positive comments and ideas.I think RTC is a very good advice to have at least 3 months for the health of the community. We can return back to normal process after this trial This is my +1 Regards.Gurkan On Monday, July 3, 2017, 4:11:38 AM GMT+3, David Blevins

Re: Site NG on github

*typo: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-site-generator.git is the right one Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github |

Re: Site NG on github

imported the generator in https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=tomee-tomee-site-generator.git, will push a warning in the svn project for now and we can delete it later Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old

Re: Site NG on github

Ok submitted https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee-tomee-site-generator.git, @John: do you have more details about gitwcsub, didnt find much except it is the git replacement of svnpubsub? idea would be to sync a generated folder with the remote "content" repo. Very worse case I can add it

Re: Site NG on github

Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if you want a repository. You may also want to consider using gitwcsub instead of svnpubsub for the actual generated site. John On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:15 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Ok, let say

Re: Site NG on github

Ok, let say if there is no -1 tonight I'll update the ticket to ask it - it doesnt hurt worse case so dont think we need to wait much more, in particular if we want to work on the website now. Let me know if it is a concern at any level. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau

Re: Site NG on github

+1 On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho wrote: > I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date. > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha > wrote: > > > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need

Re: Site NG on github

As in +1 for moving the project :-) On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Junckes Filho > wrote: > >> I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date.

Re: Site NG on github

I think last time I checked github for the website was not up to date. On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Daniel Cunha wrote: > Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN. > PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's merge. > > But

Re: Site NG on github

Well, TomEE already moved to git, you don't need to use SVN. PR integration already works fine, I saw that with last Jean-Louis's merge. But yes, will be awesome to have it, we can use it like a stage and the process to deploy in prod will be identical. +1 for that. On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:56

Re: Site NG on github

This would be great, way better than doing svn patches. +1 On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi guys, > > I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks hard, > they propose us to move the project to another git repo. > >

Site NG on github

Hi guys, I asked INFRA to proxy our new website project on github but it looks hard, they propose us to move the project to another git repo. Anyone against it? For reference here is the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14249 Concretely we would get a

Re: MDB JMX Control

will open a new thread about the github integration of the site "Site NG on github" Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: MDB JMX Control

Which will be awesome if we discuss that here. So, others contributors can put their point of view as well. If we have a Pull Request for that, we can open a discussion on it. With patch file, this is more complicated for some others see the changes. IMHO. (talking about website/documentation)

Re: MDB JMX Control

Btw, Andy is working with me to put it live so everyone can review. Let's do this before applying it. On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Ivan Junckes Filho wrote: > I would love that Romain :) > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >

Re: MDB JMX Control

I would love that Romain :) On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > @Ivan: if Andy is ok and if it helps for you I think he can apply your last > patch which looks good and we can make it live to iterate from it from now > on. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau

Re: MDB JMX Control

Hello Jon, I would love to help with the documentation for this new feature. I have the website setup in my local so it is not hard to write it. I will just need some time as too many things are going on at the moment. Ivan On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore <

Re: MDB JMX Control

This has been open for a while. I will push the docs for it, but in the meantime, please let me know if there are any blockers to merge. I'll merge it in the next day or so unless there is specific blocking feedback. Many thanks. Jon On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <

Re: TOMEE-2084 - PR Pending

Thanks! On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:50 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro < jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > Thanks Daniel. I merged it > > -- > Jean-Louis Monteiro > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > http://www.tomitribe.com > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Cunha >

Re: AutoConfig - IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!

Created TomEE-2085 and https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/84 What do you think ? 2017-07-04 10:41 GMT+03:00 Romain Manni-Bucau : > +1, the indexOf was supposed to be done on getResourceIds(appResources, > type, required) not the copy (which is sorted) > > > Romain

Re: TOMEE-2084 - PR Pending

Thanks Daniel. I merged it -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Cunha wrote: > Thanks Jon for share the link. :) > > Daniel Cunha > https://twitter.com/dvlc_ > > On Jul 3, 2017 5:04 PM,

Re: AutoConfig - IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!

+1, the indexOf was supposed to be done on getResourceIds(appResources, type, required) not the copy (which is sorted) Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github

AutoConfig - IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!

Hi, I found a nasty bug in AutoConfig:2077. The comparator does not work correctly with java 8. In older java versions (older than 8), Collections.sort() always creates an array from the list content, while starting with java 8 -> it delegates to the sort() method implemented in the concrete list