|
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
|
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Sun, 01 Mar, 10:39 |
| Mark Combellack |
RE: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Mon, 02 Mar, 13:32 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Thu, 05 Mar, 14:30 |
| Yang Lei |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Tue, 10 Mar, 21:09 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Thu, 12 Mar, 11:44 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Thu, 05 Mar, 19:20 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Tue, 10 Mar, 10:40 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Tue, 10 Mar, 15:28 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Tue, 10 Mar, 15:44 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Tue, 10 Mar, 15:54 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Backward compatibility |
Thu, 12 Mar, 11:25 |
|
Re: Android progress update |
|
| Oscar Castaneda |
Re: Android progress update |
Sun, 01 Mar, 16:13 |
| Adriano Crestani |
Re: Android progress update |
Wed, 04 Mar, 21:09 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Android progress update |
Wed, 04 Mar, 21:41 |
|
Re: Android good and bad news |
|
| Oscar Castaneda |
Re: Android good and bad news |
Sun, 01 Mar, 16:19 |
| Luciano Resende |
[2.x] Failing unit tests due to classPath issues in Eclipse PDE platform |
Mon, 02 Mar, 06:45 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] Failing unit tests due to classPath issues in Eclipse PDE platform |
Mon, 02 Mar, 07:47 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] Failing unit tests due to classPath issues in Eclipse PDE platform |
Mon, 02 Mar, 10:47 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] Failing unit tests due to classPath issues in Eclipse PDE platform |
Mon, 02 Mar, 11:41 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [2.x] Failing unit tests due to classPath issues in Eclipse PDE platform |
Mon, 02 Mar, 17:27 |
|
Re: Tuscany maven archetypes |
|
| ant elder |
Re: Tuscany maven archetypes |
Mon, 02 Mar, 10:54 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Tuscany maven archetypes |
Mon, 02 Mar, 11:07 |
| ant elder |
Re: Tuscany maven archetypes |
Mon, 02 Mar, 20:21 |
| ant elder |
2.0 M2 release? |
Mon, 02 Mar, 11:18 |
| ant elder |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 05 Mar, 09:19 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 05 Mar, 16:55 |
| ant elder |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 05 Mar, 17:07 |
| ant elder |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Wed, 18 Mar, 09:29 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Wed, 18 Mar, 10:14 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Wed, 18 Mar, 10:26 |
| ant elder |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Wed, 18 Mar, 10:48 |
| ant elder |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Sat, 21 Mar, 09:05 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Sat, 21 Mar, 09:15 |
| ant elder |
Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Mon, 23 Mar, 09:40 |
| Raymond Feng |
Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Wed, 25 Mar, 16:09 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Wed, 25 Mar, 16:17 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 00:31 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 07:44 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 11:15 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 16:08 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 16:44 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 17:06 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 17:09 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 18:35 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 19:03 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 20:02 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 20:08 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 21:57 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Fri, 27 Mar, 07:58 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Fri, 27 Mar, 15:30 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Fri, 27 Mar, 16:14 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Fri, 27 Mar, 16:16 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Fri, 27 Mar, 17:06 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Sun, 29 Mar, 22:30 |
| ant elder |
Re: Ship OSGi RFC119 prototype in M2? was: Re: 2.0 M2 release? |
Thu, 26 Mar, 16:46 |
|
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
|
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Mon, 02 Mar, 11:20 |
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Mon, 02 Mar, 11:33 |
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Wed, 04 Mar, 11:24 |
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Wed, 04 Mar, 11:37 |
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Fri, 06 Mar, 12:39 |
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Sun, 15 Mar, 10:05 |
|
[continuum] BUILD ERROR: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
|
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD ERROR: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Mon, 02 Mar, 11:25 |
| Contin...@vmbuild.apache.org |
[continuum] BUILD ERROR: Tuscany - Apache Tuscany SCA Implementation Project - |
Wed, 04 Mar, 11:29 |
|
Re: Doubts related to the binding.ws |
|
| Douglas Leite |
Re: Doubts related to the binding.ws |
Mon, 02 Mar, 17:35 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: Doubts related to the binding.ws |
Mon, 02 Mar, 18:16 |
| Douglas Leite |
Re: Doubts related to the binding.ws |
Tue, 03 Mar, 13:49 |
| Lakshman Mukkamalla |
Re: Doubts related to the binding.ws |
Thu, 19 Mar, 06:46 |
| Dave Sowerby |
Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Mon, 02 Mar, 17:41 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Mon, 02 Mar, 18:26 |
| Dave Sowerby |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:16 |
| Dave Sowerby |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Tue, 03 Mar, 14:34 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Wed, 04 Mar, 10:16 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Wed, 04 Mar, 10:30 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Wed, 04 Mar, 10:36 |
| ant elder |
Re: Binding a single service with both SOAP/HTTP and SOAP/JMS |
Wed, 04 Mar, 10:58 |
| Ramkumar Ramalingam (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2875) Unannotated spring context's are not interpreted correctly w.r.t references vs properties. |
Mon, 02 Mar, 18:28 |
|
Re: [1.x] implementation.spring component type generation |
|
| Ramkumar R |
Re: [1.x] implementation.spring component type generation |
Mon, 02 Mar, 18:32 |
| Ramkumar Ramalingam (JIRA) |
[jira] Updated: (TUSCANY-2875) Unannotated spring context's are not interpreted correctly w.r.t references vs properties. |
Tue, 03 Mar, 06:58 |
| Ramkumar Ramalingam (JIRA) |
[jira] Resolved: (TUSCANY-2875) Unannotated spring context's are not interpreted correctly w.r.t references vs properties. |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:00 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2872) Maven Bundle Plugin throws NPE when a dependent non-OSGI jar has no manifest |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:38 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2873) Wrapping of non-OSGi components creates versions that may makes no-sense |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:42 |
|
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2873) Wrapping of non-OSGi components creates versions that may makes no-sense |
|
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2873) Wrapping of non-OSGi components creates versions that may makes no-sense |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:50 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2873) Wrapping of non-OSGi components creates versions that may makes no-sense |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:58 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2872) Maven Bundle Plugin throws NPE when a dependent non-OSGI jar has no manifest |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:50 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2877) Introducing a generic Eclipse-BuddyPolicy header for the bundles generated from dependent artifacts would be helpful |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:52 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Closed: (TUSCANY-2876) In artifact aggrations, artifactMemebers is misspelled and may lead to error prone configurations |
Tue, 03 Mar, 07:56 |
| ant elder |
JSP taglib DOCTYPE problem |
Tue, 03 Mar, 08:22 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: JSP taglib DOCTYPE problem |
Tue, 03 Mar, 16:39 |
| ant elder |
Re: JSP taglib DOCTYPE problem |
Tue, 03 Mar, 17:07 |
| ant elder |
1.0.1 release of the bundle plugin |
Tue, 03 Mar, 08:29 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: 1.0.1 release of the bundle plugin |
Tue, 03 Mar, 16:43 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: 1.0.1 release of the bundle plugin |
Wed, 04 Mar, 09:46 |
| kujunguo kujunguo |
About the property value |
Tue, 03 Mar, 09:29 |
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2898) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type |
Tue, 03 Mar, 09:44 |
|
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2898) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type |
|
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2898) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type |
Tue, 03 Mar, 09:46 |
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2898) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type |
Wed, 04 Mar, 19:55 |
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2898) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type |
Thu, 05 Mar, 08:53 |
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2898) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type |
Fri, 13 Mar, 18:25 |
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2899) SCA 1.x failed to get the property value for the complex type when using @element |
Tue, 03 Mar, 10:08 |
| Dave Sowerby (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2900) WSDL Generation does not respect all binding.ws entries |
Tue, 03 Mar, 14:32 |
|
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
|
| Vamsavardhana Reddy |
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
Tue, 03 Mar, 17:12 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
Tue, 24 Mar, 09:41 |
| ant elder |
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
Tue, 24 Mar, 16:44 |
| Vamsavardhana Reddy |
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
Tue, 24 Mar, 17:44 |
| Vamsavardhana Reddy |
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
Tue, 24 Mar, 17:52 |
| ant elder |
Re: SCA Java EE: WAR contribution processing |
Wed, 25 Mar, 09:20 |
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2901) It should throw a runtime exception when component property name is not matched |
Wed, 04 Mar, 02:04 |
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2902) @many="false" of the property failed to restrict the multi values |
Wed, 04 Mar, 04:03 |
| Ku Jun Guo (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2903) There is no @replace attribute for <wire> |
Wed, 04 Mar, 05:54 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-2904) <binding.ws> jms error when jms transport is not configured |
Wed, 04 Mar, 10:45 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2904) <binding.ws> jms error when jms transport is not configured |
Wed, 04 Mar, 12:17 |
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2897) requestConnection and responseConnection in JMSBinding model should be QNames not Strings |
Wed, 04 Mar, 13:45 |
|
=?utf-8?B?UmU6IFJlOiBUdXNjYW55LWJhc2VkIE1JRCBkYXRhIHN0YXRlIG1vbml0b3Jpbmcgc2VydmljZQ==?= |
|
| lixiang03 |
=?utf-8?B?UmU6IFJlOiBUdXNjYW55LWJhc2VkIE1JRCBkYXRhIHN0YXRlIG1vbml0b3Jpbmcgc2VydmljZQ==?= |
Wed, 04 Mar, 15:20 |
| lixiang03 |
=?utf-8?B?UmU6IFJlOiBUdXNjYW55LWJhc2VkIE1JRCBkYXRhIHN0YXRlIG1vbml0b3Jpbmcgc2VydmljZQ==?= |
Thu, 05 Mar, 14:45 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Re: Tuscany-based MID data state monitoring service |
Thu, 05 Mar, 19:24 |
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Resolved: (TUSCANY-2897) requestConnection and responseConnection in JMSBinding model should be QNames not Strings |
Wed, 04 Mar, 15:47 |
|
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2884) [1.x] This jira is used to submit test case |
|
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2884) [1.x] This jira is used to submit test case |
Wed, 04 Mar, 20:35 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2884) [1.x] This jira is used to submit test case |
Thu, 12 Mar, 08:58 |
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2884) [1.x] This jira is used to submit test case |
Wed, 04 Mar, 20:47 |
| Dan Becker (JIRA) |
[jira] Assigned: (TUSCANY-2871) ClassCastException using atom-abdera binding |
Wed, 04 Mar, 21:21 |
| Luciano Resende |
[2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Wed, 04 Mar, 23:59 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 05 Mar, 06:06 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 05 Mar, 15:26 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 05 Mar, 16:38 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 05 Mar, 16:45 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 05 Mar, 18:23 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 05 Mar, 22:36 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Fri, 06 Mar, 04:43 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Mon, 09 Mar, 17:48 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 12 Mar, 06:08 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: [2.x] Progress update on bringing up Tuscany SCA Runtime to the latest OASIS SCA Schemas |
Thu, 12 Mar, 06:48 |