Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-830 support multiple patch str… #906

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 23, 2015

Conversation

aloubyansky
Copy link
Contributor

…eams for the same installation

split installation manager and installed identity

multiple identities per installation manager

added patch-stream runtime resource - a child of core-service=patching, added stream name arg to the tool API and PatchingException, added optional --patch-stream arg to the CLI patch command, made patch-info OSH delegate to read-resource in case patch-id was not specified

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Windows Build 1744 is now running using a merge of c29a257

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Linux Build 2218 is now running using a merge of c29a257

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Core - Full Integration Build 1356 is now running using a merge of c29a257

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Windows Build 1744 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of c29a257
Summary: Tests passed: 3381, ignored: 63 Build time: 0:35:07

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Linux Build 2218 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of c29a257
Summary: Tests passed: 3381, ignored: 63 Build time: 0:36:55

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Core - Full Integration Build 1356 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of c29a257
Summary: Tests passed: 2956, ignored: 354 Build time: 0:46:25

final ModelNode patchIdNode = PatchResourceDefinition.PATCH_ID.resolveModelAttribute(context, operation);
if(!patchIdNode.isDefined()) {
throw ControllerLogger.ROOT_LOGGER.nullNotAllowed(PatchResourceDefinition.PATCH_ID.getName());
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This doesn't seem right. If undefined is not allowed the AttributeDefinition should be configured that way and L52 will throw the exception, removing the need for this if block. But PatchResourceDefinition.PATCH_ID has allowNull set to 'true' which means the operation description will incorrectly say undefined is ok.

Perhaps the same AttributeDefinition is being used for two purposes?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right. I missed the description part of it.

@bstansberry
Copy link
Contributor

Small comments aside, it looks ok.

…eams for the same installation

split installation manager and installed identity

multiple identities per installation manager

added patch-stream runtime resource - a child of core-service=patching, added stream name arg to the tool API and PatchingException, added optional --patch-stream arg to the CLI patch command, made patch-info OSH delegate to read-resource in case patch-id was not specified

required patch-id for rollback op, optional patch-id for patch-info, removed hack for WFCORE-17, other minor fixes
@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Windows Build 1770 is now running using a merge of cea029d

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Linux Build 2246 is now running using a merge of cea029d

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Core - Full Integration Build 1382 is now running using a merge of cea029d

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Windows Build 1770 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of cea029d
Summary: Tests passed: 3383, ignored: 63 Build time: 0:35:39

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Linux Build 2246 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of cea029d
Summary: Tests passed: 3383, ignored: 63 Build time: 0:37:27

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Core - Full Integration Build 1382 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of cea029d
Summary: Tests failed: 4 (4 new), passed: 2947, ignored: 357 Build time: 0:44:11

Build problems:

Failed tests detected

Failed tests

org.jboss.as.test.integration.naming.connector.JMXConnectorTestCase.testMBeanCount: <no details avaliable>

org.jboss.as.test.integration.security.passwordmasking.PasswordMaskingInContainerTestCase.datasourceOperationsTest: <no details avaliable>

org.jboss.as.test.integration.security.vault.VaultDatasourceTestCase.testAccessThroughVaultDatasource: <no details avaliable>

org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.web.ssl.DatabaseCertLoginModuleTestCase.testDatabaseCertLoginModule: <no details avaliable>

@bstansberry
Copy link
Contributor

Interesting. I've seen that set of the same 4 failures on at least a couple other PR runs in the last day or so.

@bstansberry
Copy link
Contributor

The 4 failures were due to a problem on one of the agents; zombie process I believe.

@bstansberry
Copy link
Contributor

retest this please

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Windows Build 1772 is now running using a merge of cea029d

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Core - Full Integration Build 1385 is now running using a merge of cea029d

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Linux Build 2248 is now running using a merge of cea029d

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Windows Build 1772 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of cea029d
Summary: Tests passed: 3388, ignored: 63 Build time: 0:36:59

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Linux Build 2248 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of cea029d
Summary: Tests passed: 3388, ignored: 63 Build time: 0:39:41

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Core - Full Integration Build 1385 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of cea029d
Summary: Tests failed: 1 (1 new), passed: 2950, ignored: 357 Build time: 0:44:48

Build problems:

Failed tests detected

Failed tests

org.jboss.as.test.integration.ejb.mdb.ejb2x.MDB20TopicTestCase.testEjb20TopicMDBs: <no details avaliable>

@bstansberry bstansberry added the ready-for-merge This PR is ready to be merged and fulfills all requirements label Jul 23, 2015
@bstansberry bstansberry merged commit 4c8ef23 into wildfly:master Jul 23, 2015
spyrkob pushed a commit to spyrkob/wildfly-core that referenced this pull request Sep 17, 2020
[WFCORE-5073] ConsoleMode should not return true from hasConsole if t…
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready-for-merge This PR is ready to be merged and fulfills all requirements
Projects
None yet
3 participants