The question posed to the MP team does not really match the question posted
here, and seems to be a tangental ask.
The problem is this line of code [1], and nothing to do with TomEE's
behavior; it defaults to JSON even though the spec states it should be
YAML. Perhaps a clean solution would be
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:20 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 2018-03-19 0:07 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
>
> Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins" a écrit :
>
>
> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
> >
> > 1. code will be at geronimo -
I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>
>
> Romain
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:55 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, John.
> > >
> > > > On Feb 13, 2018, at 9:43 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>
Hey David & co
Assuming all files in the donation already have the header as found at [1],
then no an SGA wouldn't be required. We've been leaning towards keeping
SGAs just when the license and copyrights need to change. It appears the
original authors already had the ASF in mind so no need to
t; > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > &g
On 2018/02/12 20:42:58, Jonathan Gallimore
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:20 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
>
> > No Andy, as mentionned in the discussion Geronimo hosts the microprofile
> > @asf. This is why jwt should probably be
Did you tally?
I have an internal ASF use case for chatterbox that I'd like to figure out
the next steps on.
John
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:21 PM David Blevins
wrote:
> My +1
>
> ... will tally shortly.
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
>
+1 IF and ONLY IF Sheldon has a class named Cooper.
On Sep 8, 2017 5:24 PM, "David Blevins" wrote:
> Let’s put this up for a vote. Proposal:
>
> Should we accept the code donations of Sheldon and Chatterbox as part of
> the Apache TomEE project.
>
> -
In all honesty, while the ASF as a whole doesn't have a true strategy, or
expect projects to work to benefit each other, I do think in this situation
it makes a lot of sense to think about the various communities at the ASF
and do some thinking around what makes the most sense for a user of Apache
Don't forget to do IP clearance
I personally think these are awesome projects. David's been passionate
about this stuff for a long time, and I was really hopefully to get these
MDB enhancements working on the JMS spec, never happened :-(
It would be great to see these at Apache, and hopefully
bucau> | JavaEE Factory
> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>
> 2017-07-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
>
> > Would be better to request a git repo via https://reporeq.apache.org/ if
> > you want a repository. You may
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
I think it would be great to start a project in any form for the security
spec.
John
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 11:35 AM Mark Struberg
wrote:
> Or a subproject somewhere if we create it from scratch and don't take over
> any existing sources where the IP is not 100%
Don't forget, TomEe will ship Geronimo jars. If you reference Javax.el
you'll get duplicates
On Aug 23, 2016 17:25, "Alex Soto" wrote:
> Then now I have no idea, it seems emedded instance does not contain the
> javax.el interpreter. Can you try using remote artifacts?
>
> El
Looks like he has a master branch where that works properly.
John
On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 10:35 AM Alex Soto wrote:
> At mobile now but have you tried adding classes in war project and see if
> they work and then extract to jar?
>
> El 16 jul. 2016 4:34 p. m., "Ivan St.
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:40 PM David Blevins
wrote:
>
> > On May 19, 2016, at 11:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
> >
> > 2016-05-20 1:23 GMT+02:00 David Blevins :
> >
> >> Also, we’ve historically done a preview run
on their website. validator is asl
> > AFAIK cause of JCP but orm is not. Did you find another source?
> >
> >
> > > Andy.
> > >
> > > On 2 May 2016 at 13:48, Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid>
> > > wrote:
> > >
>
you for the Java EE 7 samples
> checkup
> > :)
> >
> > It appears we fail 35% of the JAX-RS 2.0 tests. Do we know what is
> > preventing us from passing those tests?
> >
> >
> > --
> > David Blevins
> > http://twitter.com/dblevins
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
Sorry for so many posts :-)
TomEE Plus 7.0.0-M3 passes 238/338 tests in the suite.
John
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 9:30 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote:
> I ended up changing the version and updating the code. I ran the tests,
> you can see the output in this g
I ended up changing the version and updating the code. I ran the tests,
you can see the output in this gist:
https://gist.github.com/johnament/2443e79836605a913159b14295681536
TomEE Plus fails at about 100 tests.
John
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:10 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>
If it helps any, I can push up the latest TomEE version to the TomEE
profile:
https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples/blob/master/pom.xml#L690
John
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:07 PM David Blevins
wrote:
> In terms of statements of compliance, which of these Java
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 6:59 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Le 25 avr. 2016 00:36, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> a écrit :
> >
> > It doesn't make sense to jump to a 7.1 immediately without even releasing
> a
> > 7
It doesn't make sense to jump to a 7.1 immediately without even releasing a
7.0. Just confusing from a semantic versioning standpoint.
Given the current status of the TCK & ASF, I wonder if waiting for it and
claiming EE 7 compatibility at a later date would make more sense. So
maybe along what
gt; >
> > Local protocol allows nicer start so very tempted to keep it like that.
> > Servlet protocol has few bugs/issues and is not what you target by
> default
> > with embedded adapters IMO.
> > Le 4 oct. 2015 01:25, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@a
Hey Alex,
To be honest, I find the protocol section of arquillian the most confusing
for new users to pick up. Why should they care what the protocol
transferring the test data is using? I remember at the beginning, AS7 had
a JMX protocol. This made tons of sense, since it didn't impact the
David,
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:29 PM David Blevins david.blev...@gmail.com
wrote:
What do people think about dropping the drop-in-war feature in .next?
It has had two use cases:
- allow users to use their own tomcat version and just add TomEE
- allow users to use TomEE in situations
I personally like the idea of using gitflow, makes the project look more
stable and quality focused. Allows you to stay in a shape of ready to
tackle major issues immediately. Plus it makes contributions easier to
manage.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Andy Gumbrecht agumbre...@tomitribe.com
Here's hoping that one day the TomEE moves to Git.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tommy Tynjä to...@diabol.se wrote:
Your pull request will most likely be ignored. I've tried that approach as
well but since TomEE has not moved over from svn to git, it doesn't make
sense yet.
I've used the
30 matches
Mail list logo