Re: Proton C++ API update

2016-04-15 Thread Andrew Stitcher
On Fri, 2016-04-15 at 19:29 +0200, Alexandre Trufanow wrote: > The changes look good overall, removing the event class makes the > handler's > API much cleaner IMO. > I found the on_unhandled callback very useful for testing/debugging, > when I > didn't know what event to expect for my unit tests.

Re: Proton C++ API update

2016-04-15 Thread Justin Ross
To address that use case, I had in mind some improved logging tied to event dispatch. We don't have it now, but we have a natural place to put it. I think we'd want this even if we did reinstate the catchall. On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Alexandre Trufanow < alexandre.trufanow...@gmail.com>

Re: Proton C++ API update

2016-04-15 Thread Alexandre Trufanow
The changes look good overall, removing the event class makes the handler's API much cleaner IMO. I found the on_unhandled callback very useful for testing/debugging, when I didn't know what event to expect for my unit tests. Do you think there could be another way of setting a catchall for events?

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Proton 0.12.2

2016-04-15 Thread Chuck Rolke
+1 Tested proton-c and seems fine. - Original Message - > From: "Robbie Gemmell" > To: users@qpid.apache.org, pro...@qpid.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 1:28:48 PM > Subject: [VOTE] Release Qpid Proton 0.12.2 > > Hi all, > > I have put up an RC for 0.12.2, please test it a

RE: Building qpid 0.34 on Solaris

2016-04-15 Thread Adel Boutros
Hello Andrew, We finally decided to stop trying to compile it on Solaris. We estimate it will take a lot of time to make it work on Solaris (To make the unit tests pass at least). Regards,Adel > Subject: Re: Building qpid 0.34 on Solaris > From: astitc...@redhat.com > To: users@qpid.apache.org >

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Java 6.0.2 (RC1)

2016-04-15 Thread Robbie Gemmell
+1 On 15 April 2016 at 12:28, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > Given the shorter name is consistent with previous 6.0.x releases, is > what the contents are actually named, and is just nicer, I would again > suggest renaming it. It might be good to update the build to create it > with that name, e.g havin

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Proton 0.12.2

2016-04-15 Thread Ken Giusti
+1 - just verified that the change to the version in python. Since there are no python-related changes (other than the fix version), I'll likely skip pushing this up to Pypi (unless there is a general call to do so). - Original Message - > From: "Robbie Gemmell" > To: users@qpid.apache

Re: Building qpid 0.34 on Solaris

2016-04-15 Thread Andrew Stitcher
On Tue, 2016-04-12 at 14:06 +0200, Adel Boutros wrote: > Hello Raphael, > I had checked the stackoverflow link before and it seemed the only > way to fix it was to comment "__thread" but I don't find it as a good > solution as it might have side-effects. Were you able to find > something else that

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Java 6.0.2 (RC1)

2016-04-15 Thread Oleksandr Rudyy
+1 On 15 April 2016 at 12:54, Keith W wrote: > Alex/Robbie > > Thanks for spotting the missing signature. It is now fixed. > I have renamed the source artefact too. > > Regarding the src bundle name, the source artefact is being > automatically created by Maven using standard configuration from t

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Java 6.0.2 (RC1)

2016-04-15 Thread Keith W
Alex/Robbie Thanks for spotting the missing signature. It is now fixed. I have renamed the source artefact too. Regarding the src bundle name, the source artefact is being automatically created by Maven using standard configuration from the Apache parent pom. It takes the name of the parent modu

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Java 6.0.2 (RC1)

2016-04-15 Thread Robbie Gemmell
Given the shorter name is consistent with previous 6.0.x releases, is what the contents are actually named, and is just nicer, I would again suggest renaming it. It might be good to update the build to create it with that name, e.g having a dedicated module do it, or just tweak/script the process o

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Java 6.0.2 (RC1)

2016-04-15 Thread Oleksandr Rudyy
I made the following checks: 1) Verified pgp signatures against public keys in http://www.apache.org/dist/qpid/KEYS. Keith's signature is not there and should be appended manually. 2) Source bundle is named qpid-java-build-6.0.2.tar.gz but the site generating script(s) expect(s) it to be named qpid

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Proton 0.12.2

2016-04-15 Thread Keith W
+1 * Tested staged Proton-J artefacts with Qpid JMS Client 0.9.0 against Java Broker (trunk) using the Joram test suite configured to use SSL On 14 April 2016 at 20:33, Timothy Bish wrote: > On 04/14/2016 01:28 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I have put up an RC for 0.12.2, please

Re: Qpid Proton Engine : source filter set

2016-04-15 Thread Robbie Gemmell
Hi Paolo, The impl does support setting filters, but there is a particularly unhelpful interface in place that doesn't expose most of the source methods, so for now you will need to use the implementation type for any newly created objects, or cast any existing objects you want to work work. I've

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Java 6.0.2 (RC1)

2016-04-15 Thread Keith W
+1 Making my own vote and testing explicit: 1) Verified the md5/sha checksums on all binaries 2) Verified signatures on all binaries 3) Built/ran test profiles mms/dby/bdb for 0-9 and 0-10 from source bundle 4) Ran hello world against staged maven artefacts against broker from binary distribution

Qpid Proton Engine : source filter set

2016-04-15 Thread Paolo Patierno
Hi, am I wrong or the Qpid Proton Engine APIs haven't support for filter set on source ? I'm interested in the Java implementation. Thanks, Paolo. Paolo PatiernoSenior Software Engineer (IoT) @ Red Hat Microsoft MVP on Windows Embedded & IoTMicrosoft Azure Advisor Twitter : @ppatierno Linkedin