| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Closed: (TUSCANY-2858) Bring up the initail webapp runtime support in 2.x |
Mon, 01 Jun, 06:50 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Closed: (TUSCANY-2791) Update schema namespaces to match the latest OASIS specifications |
Mon, 01 Jun, 06:50 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Closed: (TUSCANY-2786) JARs nested within contributions do not get added to the classpath |
Mon, 01 Jun, 06:50 |
| ant elder (JIRA) |
[jira] Updated: (TUSCANY-3037) binding-notification-producer failure on message send |
Mon, 01 Jun, 06:52 |
|
Re: svn commit: r779869 - /tuscany/java/sca/distribution/tomcat/tomcat-war/pom.xml |
|
| ant elder |
Re: svn commit: r779869 - /tuscany/java/sca/distribution/tomcat/tomcat-war/pom.xml |
Mon, 01 Jun, 07:32 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: svn commit: r779869 - /tuscany/java/sca/distribution/tomcat/tomcat-war/pom.xml |
Mon, 01 Jun, 17:22 |
|
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
|
| ant elder |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Mon, 01 Jun, 07:55 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Mon, 08 Jun, 08:10 |
| ant elder |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Mon, 08 Jun, 08:25 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Mon, 08 Jun, 15:42 |
| ant elder |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Mon, 08 Jun, 15:50 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Mon, 08 Jun, 16:22 |
| ant elder |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Tue, 09 Jun, 10:33 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Node usage of the workspace and implementation-node modules |
Tue, 09 Jun, 15:34 |
|
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
|
| Simon Laws |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Mon, 01 Jun, 10:28 |
| ant elder |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Mon, 01 Jun, 11:54 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Mon, 01 Jun, 12:44 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Mon, 01 Jun, 15:43 |
| ant elder |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Tue, 02 Jun, 05:55 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Tue, 02 Jun, 08:10 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Tue, 02 Jun, 15:41 |
| ant elder |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Wed, 03 Jun, 09:15 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Tue, 02 Jun, 08:08 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Discovery-based SCA Domain for OSGi RFC 119 |
Mon, 01 Jun, 16:02 |
| Kelvin Goodson (JIRA) |
[jira] Resolved: (TUSCANY-3020) uniqueness spec constraint of QName in definitions not enforced |
Mon, 01 Jun, 10:40 |
| Kelvin Goodson (JIRA) |
[jira] Updated: (TUSCANY-3020) uniqueness spec constraint of QName in definitions not enforced |
Mon, 01 Jun, 10:42 |
| Kelvin Goodson (JIRA) |
[jira] Reopened: (TUSCANY-3020) uniqueness spec constraint of QName in definitions not enforced |
Mon, 01 Jun, 10:44 |
| kelvin goodson |
npe when trying to resolve namespace import in composite model resolver |
Mon, 01 Jun, 16:03 |
| Mike Edwards |
Re: npe when trying to resolve namespace import in composite model resolver |
Wed, 03 Jun, 15:09 |
| kelvin goodson |
Re: npe when trying to resolve namespace import in composite model resolver |
Wed, 03 Jun, 18:31 |
| Raymond Feng |
Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 16:12 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 17:11 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 17:24 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 17:28 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 19:03 |
| Simon Nash |
Re: Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Tue, 02 Jun, 14:18 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Which level of Tuscany/SCA 1.x version should be used for the TravelSample in the sandbox? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 18:30 |
|
Re: Commit comment quality? |
|
| ant elder |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Mon, 01 Jun, 16:15 |
| Simon Nash |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Tue, 02 Jun, 14:17 |
| ant elder |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Tue, 02 Jun, 14:39 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 03:25 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Tue, 02 Jun, 15:42 |
| ant elder |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 06:36 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 06:55 |
| Vamsavardhana Reddy |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 07:32 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 13:27 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 13:45 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 13:52 |
| ant elder |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 14:02 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 16:07 |
| ant elder |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 16:38 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 24 Jun, 16:54 |
| Simon Nash |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Thu, 25 Jun, 14:39 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Thu, 25 Jun, 14:51 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 06:32 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 07:48 |
| Simon Nash |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Thu, 04 Jun, 12:42 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Thu, 04 Jun, 13:34 |
| ant elder |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Fri, 05 Jun, 07:18 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Fri, 05 Jun, 07:27 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Fri, 05 Jun, 07:33 |
| Mike Edwards |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 15:16 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 18:13 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Thu, 04 Jun, 06:14 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: Commit comment quality? |
Thu, 04 Jun, 07:16 |
| Kaushik Mukherjee (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3068) Validate wire format and operation selection SCDL elements |
Mon, 01 Jun, 20:31 |
| Kaushik Mukherjee (JIRA) |
[jira] Updated: (TUSCANY-3068) Validate wire format and operation selection SCDL elements |
Mon, 01 Jun, 20:31 |
|
Re: svn commit: r780790 - /tuscany/sandbox/rfeng/scatours-creditcard-payment-dosgi-contribution/pom.xml - problems downloading version 1.12 of jaxws-maven-plugin |
|
| Mark Combellack |
Re: svn commit: r780790 - /tuscany/sandbox/rfeng/scatours-creditcard-payment-dosgi-contribution/pom.xml - problems downloading version 1.12 of jaxws-maven-plugin |
Mon, 01 Jun, 20:31 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: svn commit: r780790 - /tuscany/sandbox/rfeng/scatours-creditcard-payment-dosgi-contribution/pom.xml - problems downloading version 1.12 of jaxws-maven-plugin |
Mon, 01 Jun, 21:11 |
| Mark Combellack |
Re: svn commit: r780790 - /tuscany/sandbox/rfeng/scatours-creditcard-payment-dosgi-contribution/pom.xml - problems downloading version 1.12 of jaxws-maven-plugin |
Mon, 01 Jun, 21:47 |
| Raymond Feng (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3069) Implementation.spring cannot resolve the location or bean classes if the contribution is not on the TCCL |
Mon, 01 Jun, 23:21 |
| haleh mahbod |
Link to 2.x doc is broken |
Tue, 02 Jun, 01:07 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Link to 2.x doc is broken |
Tue, 02 Jun, 03:31 |
| Raymond Feng |
How to resolve @location for implementation.spring? |
Tue, 02 Jun, 04:44 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: How to resolve @location for implementation.spring? |
Mon, 08 Jun, 16:35 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: How to resolve @location for implementation.spring? |
Mon, 15 Jun, 16:20 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: How to resolve @location for implementation.spring? |
Wed, 17 Jun, 11:07 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: How to resolve @location for implementation.spring? |
Wed, 17 Jun, 18:30 |
|
Re: TUSCANY-2939 - Supporting HTML Content Type when using Generic Collection with Atom Binding |
|
| ant elder |
Re: TUSCANY-2939 - Supporting HTML Content Type when using Generic Collection with Atom Binding |
Tue, 02 Jun, 06:55 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: TUSCANY-2939 - Supporting HTML Content Type when using Generic Collection with Atom Binding |
Tue, 02 Jun, 07:07 |
| ant elder |
Re: TUSCANY-2939 - Supporting HTML Content Type when using Generic Collection with Atom Binding |
Wed, 03 Jun, 08:48 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: TUSCANY-2939 - Supporting HTML Content Type when using Generic Collection with Atom Binding |
Wed, 03 Jun, 09:54 |
|
Re: Android front end for the SCATour sample application |
|
| Luciano Resende |
Re: Android front end for the SCATour sample application |
Tue, 02 Jun, 06:56 |
| Ā |
Unsubscribe |
Tue, 02 Jun, 08:11 |
| Rupesh M G |
Re: tuscany + bpel + webservice |
Tue, 02 Jun, 11:22 |
|
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
|
| Ramkumar R |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Tue, 02 Jun, 11:43 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 08:54 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Wed, 03 Jun, 09:06 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Mon, 08 Jun, 08:30 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Mon, 08 Jun, 09:38 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Mon, 08 Jun, 09:44 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Tue, 09 Jun, 14:31 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Tue, 09 Jun, 14:51 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Wed, 10 Jun, 07:21 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Wed, 10 Jun, 07:25 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Wed, 10 Jun, 07:50 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Thu, 11 Jun, 07:58 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Thu, 11 Jun, 08:52 |
| kelvin goodson |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Thu, 11 Jun, 07:52 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Fri, 12 Jun, 09:49 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Fri, 12 Jun, 09:56 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Fri, 12 Jun, 10:09 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Fri, 12 Jun, 15:42 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Fri, 12 Jun, 16:04 |
| Ramkumar R |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Mon, 15 Jun, 11:07 |
| Simon Laws |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Mon, 15 Jun, 17:15 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Mon, 15 Jun, 18:02 |
| ant elder |
Re: [2.x] What will be in 2.x M3? |
Tue, 16 Jun, 21:18 |
| Douglas Leite |
[GSoC] 1st and 2nd Week Progress |
Tue, 02 Jun, 20:27 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3070) ModuleActivators being picked up twice from the classpath |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:39 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3071) Dependency ordering |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:43 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3072) Domain manager error handling |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:45 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3073) Callbacks are not constructed correctly in the distributed domain for binding.sca |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:47 |
| lookman sanni |
Weekly progress - GSOC09 |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:48 |
| lookman sanni |
Re: Weekly progress - GSOC09 |
Sun, 07 Jun, 23:04 |
| Oscar Castaņeda |
Re: Weekly progress - GSOC09 |
Mon, 15 Jun, 15:40 |
| Oscar Castaņeda |
Re: Weekly progress - GSOC09 |
Mon, 22 Jun, 22:09 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3074) Domain Manager generated binding names that are not QNames |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:49 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3075) The composite processor shouldn't write out references and services generated to handle callbacks. |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:51 |
| Simon Laws (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3076) Dealock in binding.ws for 2 concurrent callbacks |
Tue, 02 Jun, 21:53 |
| Simon Laws |
[1.x] distributed travel sample pain |
Tue, 02 Jun, 22:32 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: [1.x] distributed travel sample pain |
Wed, 03 Jun, 06:49 |
| Raymond Feng (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3077) SCA node cannot be stopped as ConversationManagerImpl holds a thread pool using ScheduledExecutorService |
Wed, 03 Jun, 05:58 |
|
Re: how to access another SCA Component in BPEL |
|
| Rupesh M G |
Re: how to access another SCA Component in BPEL |
Wed, 03 Jun, 06:01 |
| Luciano Resende |
Re: how to access another SCA Component in BPEL |
Wed, 03 Jun, 06:18 |
| Peng Han |
Re: how to access another SCA Component in BPEL |
Wed, 03 Jun, 10:21 |
|
Re: svn commit: r781243 - /tuscany/java/sca/modules/binding-rmi-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/binding/rmi/provider/RMIBindingInvoker.java |
|
| ant elder |
Re: svn commit: r781243 - /tuscany/java/sca/modules/binding-rmi-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/binding/rmi/provider/RMIBindingInvoker.java |
Wed, 03 Jun, 06:06 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: svn commit: r781243 - /tuscany/java/sca/modules/binding-rmi-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/binding/rmi/provider/RMIBindingInvoker.java |
Wed, 03 Jun, 06:47 |
|
Re: ** WARNING ** node-impl2 can cause hard to diagnose errors with OSGi |
|
| ant elder |
Re: ** WARNING ** node-impl2 can cause hard to diagnose errors with OSGi |
Wed, 03 Jun, 09:22 |
| ant elder |
Re: ** WARNING ** node-impl2 can cause hard to diagnose errors with OSGi |
Tue, 09 Jun, 10:20 |
| Raymond Feng |
Re: ** WARNING ** node-impl2 can cause hard to diagnose errors with OSGi |
Tue, 09 Jun, 15:38 |
| Sean Zhou (JIRA) |
[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3078) substitutionGroup is missing in ATOM binding, HTTP binding, and Widget impl |
Wed, 03 Jun, 21:54 |
| Luciano Resende (JIRA) |
[jira] Updated: (TUSCANY-3078) substitutionGroup is missing in ATOM binding, HTTP binding, and Widget impl |
Wed, 03 Jun, 22:26 |