Bugs item #706799, was opened at 2003-03-20 10:31
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=706799group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Dheeraj Srivastava (dheeraj_s)
Assigned to: austin
Hi,
Is it reasonable to assume that the jboss.net xdoclet subtask that was
being worked on nearly a year ago is currently not used in anger
anywhere? I can see a couple of flavours of the code (in
org.jboss.net.xdoclet and also thirdparty/xdoclet/jboss.net) in
Branch_3_2, but I can't see any
Bugs item #707400, was opened at 2003-03-21 09:53
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=707400group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Simone (milasx)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous
Bugs item #707400, was opened at 2003-03-21 09:53
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=707400group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: v3.2
Status: Deleted
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Simone (milasx)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous
I'd like to make a proposal to support JBoss tooling:
Usecase: For examplea JMX and JNDI client that need to access
different versions of JBoss servers.
Problem:
1.) The client libs for example between 3.0.6 and 3.2.0RC3 are
incompatible. Accessing JMX for a 3.2.0 with client libs of 3.0.6
It's interesting, since I didn't think anyone in JBoss was bluffing.
Question, though: JBoss is free, right? Therefore, before Sun goes around with the
bravado, couldn't they have downloaded JBoss and run it against the compliance suite
to know if it would pass or not? It seems to me that,
At least the copy in HEAD is actually for xdoclet 1.2. When I migrated
HEAD to xdoclet 1.2 I basically ignored the jboss.net xdoclet task. I'd
say if the testsuite is OK, it is safe to ignore and let the jboss.net
folks fix if there is a problem later.
thanks
david jencks
On 2003.03.20 17:44
Bugs item #707485, was opened at 2003-03-21 13:16
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=707485group_id=22866
Category: JBossMQ
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Rod Burgett (rodburgett)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #706494, was opened at 2003-03-19 12:07
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=706494group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Closed
Resolution: Works For Me
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Dan Ciarniello (dciarnie)
I will cater for backporting the jboss.net 1.2 module into the 3.2 branch.
It is used (in CVS) in the jboss.net testsuite which is still decoupled from
the main testsuite
as long as J2EE1.4 is not mandatory.
CGJ
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.4.1_02
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
I've updated the build.xml files to use xdoclet 1.2 (pre b3).
It has the same jars as HEAD, although with correspondingly different
names.
I suspect that we should change these at some point to include version
info like a lot of the other jars.
i will tackle Branch_3_0 next, unless anyone has
There is not the main directory in /jboss-3.0.6-src/ejb
Where can i find it?
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Coy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:03 PM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] Branch_3_2 has been updated to xdoclet 1.2
I've updated the build.xml
I was able to build with Sun JDK 1.4.1_02 on a win2k box.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: Chris Kimpton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 3:03 PM
Hi,
Is it reasonable to assume that the jboss.net xdoclet subtask that was
being worked on nearly a year ago is currently not used in anger
anywhere? I can see a couple of flavours of the code (in
org.jboss.net.xdoclet and also thirdparty/xdoclet/jboss.net) in
Branch_3_2, but I can't see any
Bugs item #704855, was opened at 2003-03-17 09:14
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=704855group_id=22866
Category: JBossSOAP
Group: CVS HEAD
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Dr. Christoph Georg Jung (cgjung)
Assigned
Hi,
Stephens noteworthy effort finally triggered me to backport the
current jboss.net xdoclet facilities from HEAD
to the 3.2 branch (and to fix the bloody view-type=both problem).
Best,
CGJ
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Stephen Coy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Freitag, 21.
Bugs item #704856, was opened at 2003-03-17 09:15
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=704856group_id=22866
Category: JBossSOAP
Group: CVS HEAD
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 6
Submitted By: Dr. Christoph Georg Jung (cgjung)
Assigned
muy bien (my spanish half takes over during the war)
much needed simplifications.
2°) IMHO, way to many files exist in /deploy
This is counterintuitive for jboss-users: it may be fine for
jboss developers but I don't think it is ok for simple users.
Agreed
First suggestion: we add a new
Bugs item #650929, was opened at 2002-12-09 15:54
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=650929group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: James Strachan (strachancambs)
Bugs item #706494, was opened at 2003-03-19 12:07
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=706494group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Closed
Resolution: Works For Me
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Dan Ciarniello (dciarnie)
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.4.1_02
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
Bugs item #707730, was opened at 2003-03-21 21:58
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=707730group_id=22866
Category: JBossMQ
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Michal Hobot (hobot)
Assigned to:
Sacha,
Regarding #2, I find the current state of /deploy to be
highly intuitive, personally. Would it be possible to make
your scheme work by giving .sar's the ability to be nested?
That way, /deploy/JMS.sar (a directory) could contain
jms-foo.sar and jms-bar.sar.
That's already
Don't be too sure that there isn't a number of months of effort to pass the
conformance suite. There are lots of edge cases and areas of interpretation
when implementing from a spec. There are also stupid things in specs that
implementers chose to implement differently with just cause.
Certainly
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1098
Successful tests: 1093
Errors:1
Failures: 4
[time of test: 2003-03-21.12-53 GMT]
[java.version:
Bugs item #707730, was opened at 2003-03-21 15:58
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=707730group_id=22866
Category: JBossMQ
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Michal Hobot (hobot)
Assigned to:
Bugs item #650929, was opened at 2002-12-09 16:54
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=650929group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: James Strachan (strachancambs)
I'll be waiting to catch the flotsam work if/when that happens. I'm sure a lot of us
minor players will.
Still, my question stands- Sun could have downloaded JBoss and tested it on their own,
couldn't they? Why make comments like we don't think they'll pass then?
-Original Message-
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.4.1_02
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
Bugs item #707784, was opened at 2003-03-21 23:15
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=707784group_id=22866
Category: CatalinaBundle
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Bob Cotton (bcotton969)
Assigned to: Scott M
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1146
Successful tests: 1138
Errors:8
Failures: 0
[time of test: 2003-03-21.23-39 GMT]
[java.version:
Hi,
Have you tried this on any unix boxes recently?
Both my Mac and Linux boxes yield over 150 errors using 1.4.1 and over
50 using 1.3.1.
I run the all configuration.
Most of the errors seem to be deployment related in one way or another.
For example, the bank and bankiiop tests fail en
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1144
Successful tests: 1127
Errors:16
Failures: 1
[time of test: 2003-03-22.02-33 GMT]
[java.version:
I am seeing more errors on an OSX run with 1.3.1 I just made, but not
near the number you are seeing. The summary will be mail out shortly. I
am seeing a problem with tomcat not looking up the java:comp binding
correctly so perhaps if I resolve that it will help.
Scott
The following two tests are consistently timing out in runs of the testsuite in 3.2:
[junit] TEST org.jboss.test.entity.test.PathologicalUnitTestCase FAILED (timeout)
[junit] TEST org.jboss.test.lock.test.EnterpriseEntityStressTestCase FAILED
(timeout)
Can you look into these if you
The 3.2 jmx module has its own logging package that duplicates the functionality
of the common module logging framework, and does so incompatbility. If I set
the org.jboss.mx.loading category logging level to common module
org.jboss.logging.XLevel#TRACE
I am getting a ClassCastException due to
37 matches
Mail list logo
