Re: Build failed in Jenkins: Tuscany-2x #346

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Apache Jenkins Server jenk...@builds.apache.org wrote: See https://builds.apache.org/job/Tuscany-2x/346/changes Changes: [rfeng] Upgrade to jackson 1.8.5 [rfeng] Fix the Date format for json data binding [slaws] Exclude sample html files from legal checks

[jira] [Assigned] (TUSCANY-3939) URLClassLoader locks the contrubution jar.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3939?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] ant elder reassigned TUSCANY-3939: -- Assignee: ant elder URLClassLoader locks the contrubution jar.

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: Tuscany-2x #346

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Simon Laws simonsl...@googlemail.com wrote: I can't seem to get to the rat log file in Jenkins. Can someone point me at the right place. Am rebuilding locally to reproduce. Its at

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: Tuscany-2x #346

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 11:17 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Simon Laws simonsl...@googlemail.com wrote: I can't seem to get to the rat log file in Jenkins. Can someone point me at the right place. Am rebuilding locally to reproduce. Its at

[jira] [Commented] (TUSCANY-3939) URLClassLoader locks the contrubution jar.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3939?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13098870#comment-13098870 ] ant elder commented on TUSCANY-3939: I've added some code that uses the

Serializing interface contracts

As an alternative to writing out WSDL I'm wondering whether it will be more effective/efficient to just write out our internal interface model. I put code in to write out the WSDL and (most of it) is live in the build again however It concerns we as we always end up generating WSDL and, given the

[jira] [Updated] (TUSCANY-3940) Change AsyncJDKInvocationHandler to use WorkScheduler directly

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3940?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-3940: - Attachment: TUSCANY-3940.patch Change AsyncJDKInvocationHandler to use WorkScheduler

[jira] [Created] (TUSCANY-3940) Change AsyncJDKInvocationHandler to use WorkScheduler directly

Change AsyncJDKInvocationHandler to use WorkScheduler directly -- Key: TUSCANY-3940 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3940 Project: Tuscany Issue Type: Improvement

[jira] [Updated] (TUSCANY-3940) Change AsyncJDKInvocationHandler to use WorkScheduler directly

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3940?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-3940: - Description: AsyncJDKInvocationHandler obtains an ExecutorService from the

[jira] [Created] (TUSCANY-3941) Reference with binding.sca uri=targetService may be resolved with another binding when target service is exposed over multiple bindings

Reference with binding.sca uri=targetService may be resolved with another binding when target service is exposed over multiple bindings -- Key:

[jira] [Created] (TUSCANY-3942) Should reference target=XXX with empty child binding.sca element be allowed?

Should reference target=XXX with empty child binding.sca element be allowed? - Key: TUSCANY-3942 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3942 Project: Tuscany

[jira] [Updated] (TUSCANY-3942) Should reference target=XXX with empty child binding.sca element be allowed?

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Scott Kurz updated TUSCANY-3942: Description: Should this be allowed? (I should have phrased this as uri-less binding.sca rather