+1
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Willem Jiang wrote:
> It makes sense.
> +1 for it.
>
>
> On 4/25/12 2:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>>
>> Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
>> 2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was released
>> over a
>> y
It makes sense.
+1 for it.
On 4/25/12 2:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was released over a
year ago and 2.5.x 6 months ago. (and 2.6 last week). Thus, there has
been plen
+1
Freeman
On 2012-4-25, at 上午2:30, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was
released over a
year ago and 2.5.x 6 months ago. (and 2.6 last week). Thus, there
has
been plenty of
Puh-lease do! +1.
Jeff
On Apr 24, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
> 2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was released over a
> year ago and 2.5.x 6 months ago. (and 2.6 last week). Thus, t
+1 - non binding.
On Apr 24, 2012, at 2:42 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> +1
>
> Christian
>
> Am 24.04.2012 20:30, schrieb Daniel Kulp:
>> Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
>> 2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was released over a
>>
On Monday, April 16, 2012 10:10:36 PM Daniel Kulp wrote:
> Hmm... I kind of expect the catalog to work, but not completely surprised
> that it doesn't. that involves classloader resource lookups which is
> definitely an issue in OSGi.
>
> I'll look more next week (on vacation this week) unless s
+1
Christian
Am 24.04.2012 20:30, schrieb Daniel Kulp:
Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was released over a
year ago and 2.5.x 6 months ago. (and 2.6 last week). Thus, there has
been plenty of oppor
+1
Oli
--
Oliver Wulff
Blog: http://owulff.blogspot.com
Solution Architect
http://coders.talend.com
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
Von: Daniel Kulp [dk...@apache.org]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. April 2012 20:30
Bis: dev
Just wanted to open up a discussion about dropping support for 2.3.x.
2.3.0 was release over 18 months ago. Since then, 2.4.x was released over a
year ago and 2.5.x 6 months ago. (and 2.6 last week). Thus, there has
been plenty of opportunity (a whole year) for people to upgrade to newer
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:57 AM, Freeman Fang wrote:
> Hi Benson,
>
> May not answer you question directly about the tomcat embedding.
> You mentioned that the jetty bugs that close 'idle' connections, I ran
> into a similar issue months ago, and setMaxIdleTime on jetty can perfectly
> resolve i
Hi Benson,
May not answer you question directly about the tomcat embedding.
You mentioned that the jetty bugs that close 'idle' connections, I
ran into a similar issue months ago, and setMaxIdleTime on jetty can
perfectly resolve it, not sure it's exactly same problem you encounter
with j
Hi Oli,
On 24/04/12 06:35, Oliver Wulff wrote:
Hi all
As per our previous roadmap discussion here:
http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Roadmap-for-fediz-in-sandbox-td5603441.html
I'd like to push forward and get a release of Fediz ready. Thus, I'm planning
to move it out of sandbox into cxf/f
It could be more easy to leverage the servlet transport (which could be
used across the web container)
instead of starting the engine inside the CXF.
On Tue Apr 24 08:44:13 2012, Benson Margulies wrote:
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
Really? AFAICT the code I linked to *i
+1.
Colm.
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Oliver Wulff wrote:
> Hi all
>
>
>
> As per our previous roadmap discussion here:
>
> http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Roadmap-for-fediz-in-sandbox-td5603441.html
>
>
>
> I'd like to push forward and get a release of Fediz ready. Thus, I'm planning
> to
14 matches
Mail list logo
