Hi,
Look at
ava.lang.Error: Unresolved compilation problem
The constructor WSSecurityEngineResult(int) is undefined
In Cxf trunk we currently use wss4j 1.6.3-SNAPSHOT, and so you need
ensure grab the latest wss4j snapshot,
The constructor WSSecurityEngineResult(int) is added in wss4j days
ag
What's your JDK version and Maven version ?
Using the mvn -v can tell us lots of useful information :)
On Fri Sep 23 09:00:02 2011, Amish Gandhi wrote:
Hi All,
I have commented the failed tests locally (once I get my first build going I
can uncomment it).
But I am still getting failures on ecl
Hi All,
I have commented the failed tests locally (once I get my first build going I
can uncomment it).
But I am still getting failures on eclipse and mvn install.
The build is passing on Jenkins, so I think its something to do with my
setup. Any ideas?
testEncryptedSignedPartsWithCompleteCovera
Hi All,
I have updated to revision 1174448.
I have been getting a test failed since yesterday when running mvn install.
Am I not supposed to run install? Am I doing something wrong?
Thanks,
Amish.
---
T E S T S
---
On Thursday, September 22, 2011 9:12:04 PM Freeman Fang wrote:
> Hi Glen,
>
> That's not my company concern, just my personal point of view :-)
> Okay, ensure we still have those MTOSI example in SVN should be enough.
They are still available in the SVN history and the tag of every CXF release
I totally agree wit Glen on this. It should either be in or out. If a
company that provides their own distro of CXF wants to include the
MTOSI sample and the documentation for it, then that it OK for them.
The CXF community does not need to clutter up the distro with samples
that show an edge case
Hi Glen,
That's not my company concern, just my personal point of view :-)
Okay, ensure we still have those MTOSI example in SVN should be enough.
Freeman
On 2011-9-22, at 下午8:31, Glen Mazza wrote:
No, if we're keeping it in the source distribution we should keep it
in both.
This example is
No, if we're keeping it in the source distribution we should keep it in both.
This example is either Good or Not Good, and, on that basis, it should be
either included with both or excluded with both. (I understand your company
has a customer requirement to Mavenize all unmavenized binary distrib
