April 2009 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Imposed ordering of elements

by jaikiran

Doesn't xsd:all mean unordered elements? Any reason why the order is being imposed? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225105#4225105 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225105

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Imposed ordering of elements

by alesj

XmlType::propOrder View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225102#4225102 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225102

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Change to Advisor, EJB3 Acceptance Testing

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

Thanks, I've closed the JIRA issue View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225099#4225099 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225099

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Imposed ordering of elements

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

"alesj" wrote : | We need to update MC-AOP-int's xmls: | - http://hudson.qa.jboss.com/hudson/job/AOP%20MC%20Integration%20-%20No%20W... | to follow the new strict order rules Alexey impounded. The error for one of my tests is: | Caused by: org.jboss.xb.binding.JBossXBRuntimeException: {urn:jboss:aop-beans:1.0}class cannot appear in this posi | tion. Expected content of {urn:jboss:aop-beans:1.0}mixin is sequence: {urn:jboss:aop-beans:1.0}class? {urn:jboss:a | op-beans:1.0}construction? {urn:jboss:aop-beans:1.0}interfaces? | at org.jboss.xb.binding.sunday.unmarshalling.SundayContentHandler.startElement(SundayContentHandler.java:4 | 94) | My schema is: | <xsd:complexType name="mixinType"> | <xsd:annotation> | <xsd:documentation> | <![CDATA[ | A mixin within an interface introduction | ]]> | </xsd:documentation> | </xsd:annotation> | <xsd:all minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"> | <xsd:element name="interfaces" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1" /> | <xsd:element name="class" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1" /> | <xsd:element name="construction" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" /> | </xsd:all> | <xsd:attribute name="transient" type="xsd:boolean" use="optional"/> | </xsd:complexType> | So I can only conclude that the order imposed is from the order of the setters in the associated parser class, which truly sucks: | public class MixinData | { | String mixin; | boolean isTransient = true; | String construction; | String interfaces; | | public boolean getTransient() | { | return isTransient; | } | | @XmlAttribute | public void setTransient(boolean isTransient) | { | this.isTransient = isTransient; | } | | public String getMixin() | { | return mixin; | } | | @XmlElement(name="class") | public void setMixin(String mixin) | { | this.mixin = mixin; | } | | public String getConstruction() | { | return construction; | } | | public void setConstruction(String construction) | { | this.construction = construction; | } | | public String getInterfaces() | { | return interfaces; | } | | public void setInterfaces(String interfaces) | { | this.interfaces = interfaces; | } | } | Is there some annotation that can be used on the class to get rid of this imposed ordering? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225096#4225096 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225096

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - File last modified diff behavior

by alesj

I have this piece of test code | // update some file | File updateFile = new File(rootFile, "test.jsp"); | assertTrue(updateFile.exists()); | assertTrue(updateFile.setLastModified(System.currentTimeMillis())); | @SuppressWarnings("deprecation") | VirtualFile testJsp = tempRoot.findChild("test.jsp"); | long tempTimestamp = testJsp.getLastModified(); | // this should override tempJsp, hence new timestamp | assertFalse(checker.hasStructureBeenModified(originalRoot)); | long lastModified = testJsp.getLastModified(); | long diff = lastModified - tempTimestamp; | assertTrue("Last modified diff is not bigger then 0, diff: " + diff, diff > 0); | While this work for me locally (winz machine), it fails for me remotely (linux machine). This test mocks the behavior for JBAS-6722, where the user updates his original file (updateFile), and then the checker updates (overrides) the temp copy (tempJsp). Any idea why this would diff based on OS? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225090#4225090 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225090

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Change to Advisor, EJB3 Acceptance Testing

by jaikiran

Upgrading EJB3 components to org.jboss.aop:jboss-aop to 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT and org.jboss:jboss-common-core to 2.2.11.GA (this was required since common-core 2.2.5.GA doesn't have the class which this AOP fix uses) shows no regressions in any of the unit tests. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225075#4225075 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225075

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jpdl schema filename

by jbarrez

I agree, jpdl4.1.xsd is the best choce. As you say, there shouldn't be any xsd changed between micro releases View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225066#4225066 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225066

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jpdl schema filename

by camunda

Being to restrictive can result in switching off the schema validation in order to improve stuff or use new features (seen that a lot in projects)... So personally I wouldn't have too big problems if there are backward compatible changes in the Schema in Micro-Versions. And follow your instinct is never the worst idea :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225063#4225063 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225063

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jpdl schema filename

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

that is what my gutt feeling says as well. but i recall that in jbpm 3 we also did some (compatible) updates in micro releases. should we think about strickt rules. or just follow instinct to what kind of updates we can do ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225061#4225061 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225061

16 years, 12 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: NPE in transaction commit

by gaohoward

Got it running now. The NPE was gone after I simplify the examples. I split the xa example to xa-send and xa-receive to make it more concise. Because it would be easy to illustrate xa sending using message listeners, but not so for illustrating the receiving. Thanks. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225048#4225048 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225048

16 years, 12 months

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 April 2009