Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Thanks Sebastien, Raymond and Luciano. Just the one question looking at
r583587 changes - are those changes alone the ones that fixed the problem or
was this just the last of several incremental changes that went to fix
this.
- Venkat
These changes are the only one
Hi,
I'd go with 1 or 2 or 5. With 1 and 2 we have a dependency on the build
folks and if that gets a bit difficult to do, then I suppose 5 is the best
option.
Thanks
- Venkat
On 10/11/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > I have been lookin
Thanks Sebastien, Raymond and Luciano. Just the one question looking at
r583587 changes - are those changes alone the ones that fixed the problem or
was this just the last of several incremental changes that went to fix
this.
- Venkat
On 10/11/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
I have been looking into JIRA issue 1676, reporting that our top-down
build is broken.
With the fixes that went into SVN revision r583587, people should now
be able to build the whole java/sca tree from an empty Maven
repository on Maven 2.0.7.
P.S. Thanks to L
I have been looking into JIRA issue 1676, reporting that our top-down
build is broken.
With the fixes that went into SVN revision r583587, people should now be
able to build the whole java/sca tree from an empty Maven repository on
Maven 2.0.7.
P.S. Thanks to Luciano and Raymond for helping
To the specific question, the store sample is shipping the JSONRPC
proxy probably because the SCADomain.js does not have support for
components with multiple services as reported in [1].
As for a more broad number of enhancements around JSONRPC, I have
started to add support for Databindings [2],
Hi all,
We've released v1.0 of Tuscany SCA 2 weeks ago... So it's probably the
right time now to ask what people want to do next and try to build a
roadmap for the next few releases.
Here are a few random thoughts to initiate the discussion. I've just
listed the things that came to my mind t
On 10/10/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What do you mean by "the proxy that is automatically generated" ?
>
> On 10/10/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Currently the store sample ships a JSONRPC proxy (binding-jsonrpc.js) as
> an
> > alternative to the proxy that is
On 10/10/07, Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Do we have any potential consumers for this capability?
>
> If so, what are their requirements
>
>
> Yours, Mike.
>
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 10/10/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On 10/10/07, ant elder <[EMAIL P
wsdl2javagenerator and wsdl:import (ebRIM)
--
Key: TUSCANY-1841
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1841
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Java SCA Tools
Affects
The guy who raised TUSCANY-1840, Synapse, the Eclipse SOA tools project? It
could be one of those "if we make it they will use it" type of things. Can
you imagine what it would be like using wsdl without wsdl4j?
...ant
On 10/10/07, Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Do we h
On 10/10/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How are we going to handle the Tuscany extensions ? Are we going to
> include all the implementation.xxx and binding.xxx from Tuscany or
> only the minimum required to support the SCA spec 1.0 SCDL elements ?
If there does end up being s
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1832?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12533770
]
Ron Gavlin commented on TUSCANY-1832:
-
Hi Frank,
I would like to see Tuscany SDO implement standard properties
Hi Luciano
Some comments in line...
Simon
On 10/10/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How are we going to handle the Tuscany extensions ? Are we going to
> include all the implementation.xxx and binding.xxx from Tuscany or
> only the minimum required to support the SCA spec 1.0 S
Ant wrote:
>Sounds good to me, and then we could also separate the DAS/SCA/SDO builds so
>they don't share any parent that we talked about doing a while back.
I think this deserves more discussion, maybe by reactivating the old
thread around this issue [1]...
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tusca
I posted this and it probably got lost in the midst of releasing 1.0 ...
let me resend now.
Thanks,
Scott
On 9/15/07, Scott Kurz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In doing some work trying to leverage the Tuscany databinding framework to
> transform business exceptions across a binding, I noticed
Folks,
Do we have any potential consumers for this capability?
If so, what are their requirements
Yours, Mike.
ant elder wrote:
On 10/10/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/10/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How about making a tuscany-scdl4j jar for this? Something
What do you mean by "the proxy that is automatically generated" ?
On 10/10/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently the store sample ships a JSONRPC proxy (binding-jsonrpc.js) as an
> alternative to the proxy that is automatically generated. Why is this the
> case?
>
> Simon
>
--
L
How are we going to handle the Tuscany extensions ? Are we going to
include all the implementation.xxx and binding.xxx from Tuscany or
only the minimum required to support the SCA spec 1.0 SCDL elements ?
If what we want is the SCDL Model, we might be able to create a
Contribution Bootstraper, and
+1 from me.
Regards
Brady Johnson
Lead Software Developer - HydraSCA
Rogue Wave Software - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Raymond Feng [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 9:27 AM
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1832?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12533748
]
Frank Budinsky commented on TUSCANY-1832:
-
Hi Ron,
What you're doing here is really very EMF specific. Eve
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1685?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ron Gavlin updated TUSCANY-1685:
Priority: Minor (was: Critical)
Description:
I would like to use a Tuscany-implemented to
On 10/10/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/10/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > How about making a tuscany-scdl4j jar for this? Something like the
> > tuscany-sca-all jar but only containing the modules and classes
> necessary
> > for processing the scdl and creatin
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1823?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12533733
]
Mike Edwards commented on TUSCANY-1823:
---
Raymond, you asked:
"I think it requires the SCA spec clarification
Amita,
The detail of the nature of the merge you want to perform is not
completely clear, but you should be aware that inserting a DataObject
of a Type that has a ChangeSummary property into a data graph wrapped
in a DataGraph instance would violate the constraint that the scope of
monitoring of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Venkatakrishnan reassigned TUSCANY-1771:
Assignee: Venkatakrishnan
> Creating JavaDoc for the integration tests listed und
On 10/10/07, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is complete now.
>
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/Getting+Started+with+Tuscany+Release+1.0
>
>
> - Venkat
>
> On 10/4/07, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Just updated the page title - here
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Naveen updated TUSCANY-1771:
Attachment: properties.patch
I have attached the patch file which is created for the test
"/itest/proper
This is complete now.
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/Getting+Started+with+Tuscany+Release+1.0
- Venkat
On 10/4/07, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just updated the page title - here is the changed link...
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY
Currently the store sample ships a JSONRPC proxy (binding-jsonrpc.js) as an
alternative to the proxy that is automatically generated. Why is this the
case?
Simon
On 10/10/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How about making a tuscany-scdl4j jar for this? Something like the
> tuscany-sca-all jar but only containing the modules and classes necessary
> for processing the scdl and creating model objects? We did talk about
> having
> something like this
How about making a tuscany-scdl4j jar for this? Something like the
tuscany-sca-all jar but only containing the modules and classes necessary
for processing the scdl and creating model objects? We did talk about having
something like this at one point, is it worth revisiting?
...ant
On 10/9/07,
On 10/9/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It looks like people really didn't like the PMD and checkstyle stuff :)
>
> +1, and BTW, should we remove the java/buildtools as well, as they
> only have the rules for PMD and checkstyle ?
Sounds good to me, and then we could also separa
I had a look at that patch and log but don't quite see whats going on, could
you summarise what the problem is thats causing this build failure so maybe
we could all help sort it out (or at least not keep making the same
mistakes)?
...ant
On 10/10/07, Luciano Resende (JIRA) wrote:
>
>
>
34 matches
Mail list logo
