The Result returned by SDOUtil.getTypes includes DocumentRoot Type
--
Key: TUSCANY-1357
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1357
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: Bug
I have created TUSCANY-1356 for this cleanup and attached a patch
for the changes as described below.
Simon
Simon Nash wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On 6/15/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
> On 6/15/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
Testing
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1356?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Nash updated TUSCANY-1356:
Attachment: jira1356.zip
zip file containing the added files
> Clean up binding-echo and impleme
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1356?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Nash updated TUSCANY-1356:
Attachment: jira1356.diff
svn diff output for the modified files
> Clean up binding-echo and imp
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1356?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Nash updated TUSCANY-1356:
Attachment: jira1356.svnst
svn st report showing modified, deleted and added files
> Clean up bi
Clean up binding-echo and implementation-crud samples
-
Key: TUSCANY-1356
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1356
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Java
I would prefer not to delay SCA 0.91 for the DAS support. Unless we
are confident that the DAS release can be created quickly, I think
it's better to go ahead with SCA 0.91 as planned and defer the DAS
support.
An alternative packaging approach (which I am starting to think would
be even better)
Hi Nicole,
My turn to chip in :-)
I think both approaches are valid and tackle two different goals. If
I understand correctly, then the binding approach does not hand the
responsibility for the OSGi bundles and services to SCA. So this is
more of a peer-to-peer runtime view. I think this appr
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Kelvin Goodson updated TUSCANY-1351:
Fix Version/s: Java-SDO-CTS-Next
Patch Info: (was: [Patch Available])
> Some CTS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12506178
]
Kelvin Goodson commented on TUSCANY-1351:
-
I committed Andy's fix in revision 548731. I'll leave it to And
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andy Grove updated TUSCANY-1351:
Attachment: XMLDifferenceException.java
Attaching XMLDifferenceException.java required by patch.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12506170
]
Kelvin Goodson commented on TUSCANY-1351:
-
Andy,
could you attach the source for XMLDifferenceException
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1284?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Kelvin Goodson resolved TUSCANY-1284.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed while working on TUSCANY-1350 in commit 548710
> Manifest vers
I have copied the sdo-api project from the java/spec/sdo-api direcotry
in svn, to the java/sdo/sdo-api directory. I plan to delete the one
under the spec folder, but I guess I might break the nightly builds
if I do that. Since commit [1] the new copy of the spec project is
now built by the java
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1353?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12506156
]
Ron Gavlin commented on TUSCANY-1353:
-
Amita,
The BEA WebLogic Type 4 drivers are compliant with the JDBC 3.0
Hi,
In attempt to analyze JIRA-1317, I had some questions and would like to get
some
points clear.
1)Tuscany xmlHelperImpl have load() method where options can be passed in.
Why save() methods with
XMLDocument only have options supported and not for save() methods with
DataObject?
2)Why Resolvab
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1353?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12506145
]
Amita Vadhavkar commented on TUSCANY-1353:
--
What is the JDBC version compliance of this driver? In Tuscany
I did notice that the code that is responsible for creating the callback
wires / invocation chains out of createWires on the service side is
currently commented out in the CompositeActivatorImpl. When that code
is uncommented I found that the callback proxy was injected as there
were callback
Hi Luciano,
This is a surprise :)... I was planning on taking the 0.91 brn tomorrow and
imediately start getting out RCs to vote on, but I can't do that if it needs
to include the DAS beta1 release???.
What do people think?
- Venkat
On 6/18/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorr
I spend some time with XMLUnit this morning and found that it suffered from
the exact same problems as the current XMLEqualityChecker, namely that it
was not able to see that xsi:type="customer:Customer" in one document is
equivalent to xsi:type="ns0:Customer" in another. There are hooks for
provid
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12506112
]
Andy Grove commented on TUSCANY-1351:
-
I have made some more substantial changes to XMLHelperTest and
XMLEqual
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andy Grove updated TUSCANY-1351:
Attachment: (was: tuscany-1351.patch)
> Some CTS tests are tuscany specific due to namespace
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andy Grove updated TUSCANY-1351:
Attachment: tuscany-1351-v2.patch
> Some CTS tests are tuscany specific due to namespace prefix a
Hi Rajini,
I would prefer a solution where you declare explicitly the bindings, not an
implicit registration
of services.
Please find below a snippet of the OSGi prototype provided by Joel some time
ago:
RetailerComponent
Nicole,
Here is an example scenario, taken from the supplychain sample in Tuscany.
Customer and Warehouse are OSGi bundles, Retailer has a Java implementation.
A proxy service is registered in the OSGi registry for the Retailer by the
Tuscany OSGi implementation provider when CustomerComponent is
Hi Graham,
>OSGi SCA Component -- local wire --> non-OSGi SCA Component (e.g. POJO)
I'm still not sure if I understand your scenario correctly. What do you mean
with
non-OSGi SCA Component, where will it be declared? My understanding is that the
non-OSGi
SCA Component will be deployed in another
ant elder wrote:
On 6/13/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
> On 6/13/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> In multiple instances I've run into an annoying limitation of our
>> embedded Tomcat and Jetty support... We cannot serve Web con
27 matches
Mail list logo
