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.
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>
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?
+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
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
>
+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
+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
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
+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
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
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
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
+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
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
+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
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
16 matches
Mail list logo