Contribute to this Website PR

Hi TomEE devs, did a small improvement on the "Contribute to this Website" section of "Community". It was small as it was the example I used in the video I recorded teaching how to contribute to the website. I will try to edit the video a little bit and send for you to evaluate soon. PR: https://

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

Thanks Romain, Jonathan. I did this change and also put more tests: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/89 On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > SystemInstance.get().getComponent(ContainerSystem.class).getContainer(id) > > Since AutoConfig should pass before it shoul

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

I added the description in the PR too: Set activation properties on a per-container basis. This change makes activation properties belongs to a specific container. ResourceAdapter MyOTHERResourceAdapter ActivationSpecClass My.Other.ActivationSpecImpl activation.property1 = othervalu

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

SystemInstance.get().getComponent(ContainerSystem.class).getContainer(id) Since AutoConfig should pass before it should be set and if not we should just move the override dynamicdeployer at the right place to have it set and still be read by its consumers. In any case, not splitting the override l

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

There is other problem: ejbDeployment.getContainerId(); //it returns null On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Otávio Gonçalves de Santana < osant...@tomitribe.com> wrote: > String containerId = ejbDeployment.getContainerId(); > > It returns a container id, > How can I return the container from th

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

String containerId = ejbDeployment.getContainerId(); It returns a container id, How can I return the container from that? On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > org.apache.openejb.jee.oejb3.EjbDeployment#getContainerId should give you > the container > > > Romain Manni-Buc

Mailing list issues

I apologize if you see a few duplicate mails from me on this list. Not sure what happened, but checking on Nabble it looked like my posts had disappeared into a complete black hole. I tried unsubscribing and resubscribing, and reposting in an effort to "fix" it, but it looks like things may have j

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

Hi Otavio Can you give us a bit of a description about the change, and maybe a sample config? Just so everyone has some context on the change? At first glance, I'd say your testing is missing at least a scenario where the container activation properties (mdb.container.[containerID].activation.[

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

Hi Otavio, Can you give us a bit of a description about the change, and maybe a sample config? Just so everyone has some context on the change? At first glance, I'd say your testing is missing at least a scenario where the container activation properties (mdb.container.[containerID].activation.[p

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

Hi Otavio Can you give us a bit of a description about the change, and maybe a sample config? Just so everyone has some context on the change? At first glance, I'd say your testing is missing at least a scenario where the container activation properties (mdb.container.[containerID].activation.[pr

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

I took a look at that. As far as I can see, we don't have the container (or its ID) available at the time when ActivationConfigPropertyOverride. Please let us know if we've missed something there. Jon On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi Otavio, > > I have 2 notes on

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

org.apache.openejb.jee.oejb3.EjbDeployment#getContainerId should give you the container Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | Linked

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

1) Getter removed, thanks 2) I took a look at that. As far as I can see, we don't have the container (or its ID) available at the time when ActivationConfigPropertyOverride. Please let us know if we've missed something there. On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi Otavio

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

Hi Otavio, I have 2 notes on this: 1. the getProperties() is useless I think (IDE generated?) 2. it would probably better fit ActivationConfigPropertyOverride to have a right ordering of overrides, no? Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog

Re: Adds an option to ignore mdb.activation fields

I have created this resource to both master and backported. - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/90 - https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/89 On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Jonathan Gallimore < jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > We have a +1 and a +0 for the backport. I'm pulling