With the refactoring of our server endpoints to be more in line with JDG (and hence use the AS runtime bits), does it make sense for Tristan to take on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2159 ? The JIRA in question is still specific to the startServer.sh scripts, so the JIRA should be updated accordingly. And also, since it is seemingly trivial, target for Infinispan 5.2.x? What do people think? Cheers Manik -- Manik Surtani manik(a)jboss.org twitter.com/maniksurtani Platform Architect, JBoss Data Grid http://red.ht/data-grid _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

And in fact the storage-only configuration has also helped uncover a few topology bugs which were fixed during 5.2. So that issue will be implicitly be fixed when we release the community server. Tristan On 01/31/2013 10:05 AM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: > I wouldn't bother. I suggested a workaround which Martin seems to have verified to work as expected and we have a config for that in docs/examples/configs/standalone-storage-only.xml > > Cheers, > > On Jan 30, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Manik Surtani <msurtani(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> With the refactoring of our server endpoints to be more in line with JDG (and hence use the AS runtime bits), does it make sense for Tristan to take on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2159 ? The JIRA in question is still specific to the startServer.sh scripts, so the JIRA should be updated accordingly. >> >> And also, since it is seemingly trivial, target for Infinispan 5.2.x? >> _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev