On Thu, 17 May 2007, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> its probably simpler if you only handle one nested task (rather than
> a sequence), as people may have more expectations of rollback in
> such a situation.
A single task is enough anyway since people can always use
as the nested ta
--- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actaully, I did not see the manual page ;-)
> I just looked at the code - and misread it
>
> It does not do what I said,
> the task just ignores any failures until
> the end and then throws an exception
> if any failed.
>
> I guess the name of
Actaully, I did not see the manual page ;-)
I just looked at the code - and misread it
It does not do what I said,
the task just ignores any failures until
the end and then throws an exception
if any failed.
I guess the name of the task confused me.
Peter
On 5/17/07, Matt Benson <[EMAIL
--- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that we should wait for the ant 1.7.1 branch
> to
> be made.
>
> The retry task container is similar to containers in
> ant-contrib (limit, outofdate, for and if).
>
> There is actually a task called "relentless" that
> executes a sequence o
I think that we should wait for the ant 1.7.1 branch to
be made.
The retry task container is similar to containers in
ant-contrib (limit, outofdate, for and if).
There is actually a task called "relentless" that
executes a sequence of nested tasks, retrying the
sequence until all the tasks have
Kevin Jackson wrote:
Hi all,
Does anyone object to adding a retry task container to ant core?
I've made a few alterations to the code I attached to the previous email.
The only worry I have is if it's too 'workflowy', if you know what I mean.
I'm happy-ish with it...its probably simpler if
On 5/12/07, Kevin Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
noRetries as in "Number Of Retries" or "No retries"???
good point, retry count is indeed much clearer, thank you.
How about retrycount instead? --DD
PS: I second all comments made so far. could live in
Ant-Contrib too, rather than Ant
Dominique Devienne wrote:
On 5/12/07, Kevin Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
noRetries as in "Number Of Retries" or "No retries"???
How about retrycount instead? --DD
PS: I second all comments made so far. could live in
Ant-Contrib too, rather than Ant.
PPS: If had additionally a condi
On 5/12/07, Kevin Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
noRetries as in "Number Of Retries" or "No retries"???
How about retrycount instead? --DD
PS: I second all comments made so far. could live in
Ant-Contrib too, rather than Ant.
PPS: If had additionally a condition to satisfy before it
e
Jeffrey E Care wrote:
How do you signal a task to clean up after itself after a failed attempt?
yes, you need a clause, which makes rollback that much harder.
SmartFrog's life is easier as there all components have an sfTerminate()
operation that is called for them to clean up (or do a best
How do you signal a task to clean up after itself after a failed attempt?
Jeffrey E. (Jeff) Care
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IBM WebSphere Application Server
Systems Management Tools Architecture & Development
Kevin Jackson wrote:
Hi all,
Looking through the bugzilla I came across, #28736 requesting a retry
attribute for the ftp task.
I thought instead that a generic Retry task container may be useful.
I've quickly thrown this together and first tests (using get) seem to
be fine, does anyone have an
There is one of these in WebTest:
http://webtest.canoo.com/webtest/manual/retry.html
But it might be nice to have one outside WebTest as well.
You might want to guard against NoRetries being equal to 0
or change the code to skip the perform in that case. It
wouldn't be the usual case but migh
13 matches
Mail list logo
