When WS-RM is in use, some types of intermittent problems need to be
handled by the WS-RM code without any impact on the application. These
include all types of connection problems (after the initial WS-RM
connection which establishes a Sequence), both where there's an actual
I/O error in making a
Well, older versions of CXF--2.3.x and earlier--of course would
perpetually support JRE 5.0. It's just a question of moving forward, it
looks like right now 2.4 will still support 5.0 and maybe we'll switch
to 6.0 minimum in CXF 2.5. I didn't know about royalty concerns (do
you have a link f
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 5:11:27 AM Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> When WS-RM is in use, some types of intermittent problems need to be
> handled by the WS-RM code without any impact on the application. These
> include all types of connection problems (after the initial WS-RM
> connection which esta
Hi Tomasz -
I've seen you doing a bunch of fixes - thanks a million.
I'm going to start focusing on the browser too very soon - just
finalizing the last few improvements for the transformation feature.
Hope we'll get the shiny log browser ready in time for 2.4.0 :-)
talk to you later
Sergey
On T
On 02/24/2011 04:47 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 February 2011 5:11:27 AM Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>
>
>> Handling incomplete receive messages looks more involved. There are many
>> places in the code where XMLStreamException is caught and converted into
>> a Fault. I suppose I'd need
We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3
out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used as
a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE
containers.
List of issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=1231
+1
thanks, Sergey
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>
> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3
> out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used
> as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE
> containers.
>
>
> Li
+1
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> +1
>
> thanks, Sergey
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>>
>>
>> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get
>> 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from
+1,
-- Ulhas Bhole
On 23 Feb 2011, at 20:30, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>
> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3
> out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used
> as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE
> containers.
>
>
> L
+1
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:47 AM, UlhasBhole wrote:
> +1,
>
> -- Ulhas Bhole
> On 23 Feb 2011, at 20:30, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get
>> 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from
>> being us
+1
Christian
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dk...@apache.org]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2011 21:31
An: dev@cxf.apache.org
Betreff: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3
We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3
out, especially since 2.3
+1
- Dennis
On 02/24/2011 09:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3
> out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used
> as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE
> containers.
>
>
> List of issue
+1
Freeman
On 2011-2-24, at 上午4:30, Daniel Kulp wrote:
We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should
get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing
it from being used as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE
containers.
List of issues:
https://iss
13 matches
Mail list logo