March 2008 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Eager state push on failure with Buddy Replication

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

Well, either case really. In the case of the "resident" flag, this is not replicated. Even if we use a traditional region (created using the RegionManager) I don't believe this is recreated on the buddy backup instance, since Regions are explicitly created on each instance. I could be wrong as I haven't checked the code yet, but I'm pretty sure regions aren't reflected in a buddy backup subtree. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4136015#4136015 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4136015

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase todo

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : Correct. But you should only need the explict structure deployer. | There should be jboss-structure.xml files in the test deployments. Already done. ;-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4136013#4136013 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4136013

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase todo

by adrian＠jboss.org

"alesj" wrote : "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | | 2) VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase SHOULD USE THE FILESYSTEM | | | | But , this is stupid anyway. Because the VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase | | should be creating the structure from the file system. ;-) | | The whole test needs cloning rather subclassing (and before you ask, | | you can remove the attachment checks since they are irrelevant to the test). | You mean running it over Structure deployers? Correct. But you should only need the explict structure deployer. There should be jboss-structure.xml files in the test deployments. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4136011#4136011 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4136011

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Generalizing dependency injection

by alesj

"wolfc" wrote : What would the args be? Anything you like. :-) Making it a bit more portable. But then again, if you were able to change the underlying beanfactory impl, you could always introduce your own interface. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135995#4135995 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135995

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Eager state push on failure with Buddy Replication

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

I don't understand what you mean by "region marker". Are you referring to anonymous wrote : A "structural" node marker can be used instead of a region, and more cleanly indicates the meaning, since the region concept is so overloaded. anonymous wrote : ? | | | | If yes, AIUI the "structural" node marker concept doesn't really exist yet. There's the "resident" flag which IIRC is not replicated. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135981#4135981 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135981

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Portal] - Re: Portlet runtime meta data extension

by chris.laprun＠jboss.com

Sounds good. I didn't really like extending the class either. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135976#4135976 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135976

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase todo

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | 2) VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase SHOULD USE THE FILESYSTEM | | But , this is stupid anyway. Because the VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase | should be creating the structure from the file system. ;-) | The whole test needs cloning rather subclassing (and before you ask, | you can remove the attachment checks since they are irrelevant to the test). You mean running it over Structure deployers? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135970#4135970 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135970

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase todo

by adrian＠jboss.org

These tests are broken in two ways. ;-) 1) NO "" CONTEXT | Deployment deployment = createDeployment(); | StructureMetaData structure = StructureMetaDataFactory.createStructureMetaData(); | MutableAttachments attachments = (MutableAttachments) deployment.getPredeterminedManagedObjects(); | attachments.addAttachment(StructureMetaData.class, structure); | It is creating a structure with no contexts then comparing it against an artifical context it creates in the tests???? :-) | protected void checkDeployment(DeploymentContext context, Deployment deployment) throws Exception | { | assertNotNull(context); | | assertEquals(deployment.getName(), context.getName()); | | MutableAttachments attachments = (MutableAttachments) deployment.getPredeterminedManagedObjects(); | StructureMetaData structure = attachments.getAttachment(StructureMetaData.class); | checkAttachments(context, deployment); | checkDeployment(context, structure); | | // HERE! | | ContextInfo contextInfo = structure.getContext(""); | if (contextInfo == null) | contextInfo = StructureMetaDataFactory.createContextInfo(); | checkContextInfo(context, contextInfo); | } | I should probably be adding the "" context to the stucture before running it through the builder. 2) VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase SHOULD USE THE FILESYSTEM But , this is stupid anyway. Because the VFSStructureBuilderUnitTestCase should be creating the structure from the file system. ;-) The whole test needs cloning rather subclassing (and before you ask, you can remove the attachment checks since they are irrelevant to the test). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135964#4135964 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135964

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jBPM With Seam

by fady.matar

Gravel is completely scratched out ;) Regarding a full user management system I would like to do the following approaches: 1. Derive from portal integration 2. Enhance the jBPM identity component 3. Use an LDAP integration Cheers, Fady View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135958#4135958 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135958

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Invalid jboss-deployers-vfs-spi POM

by adrian＠jboss.org

org.jboss.microcontainer:jboss-deployers-* no longer exists. If you don't want to do the extra work of reading a forum where a project is being developed then don't use a snapshot. :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4135953#4135953 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4135953

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums March 2008