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
WFLY-4429 Refactor JCA subsystems ---> Use of PASSIVE services #7283
Conversation
Windows Build 1227 is now running using a merge of a910e5b |
Linux Build 6114 is now running using a merge of a910e5b |
Linux with security manager Build 1091 is now running using a merge of a910e5b |
Linux with security manager Build 1091 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of a910e5b |
Linux Build 6114 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of a910e5b Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Windows Build 1227 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of a910e5b Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Windows Build 1229 is now running using a merge of 5713e20 |
Linux Build 6116 is now running using a merge of 5713e20 |
Linux with security manager Build 1093 is now running using a merge of 5713e20 |
Linux with security manager Build 1093 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 5713e20 |
Windows Build 1229 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 5713e20 Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Linux Build 6116 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 5713e20 Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Linux Build 6118 is now running using a merge of 29ea671 |
Linux with security manager Build 1095 is now running using a merge of 29ea671 |
Windows Build 1231 is now running using a merge of 29ea671 |
Linux with security manager Build 1095 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 29ea671 |
@ctomc @bstansberry Could one of you take a look at this ? It is part 1 of what we discussed at the f2f. Persistence resource changes will follow. Thanks |
Linux Build 6118 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 29ea671 Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Windows Build 1231 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 29ea671 Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Linux with security manager Build 1096 is now running using a merge of ada8ecd |
Linux Build 6119 is now running using a merge of ada8ecd |
Windows Build 1232 is now running using a merge of ada8ecd |
Linux with security manager Build 1096 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of ada8ecd |
Windows Build 1232 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of ada8ecd Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Linux Build 6119 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of ada8ecd Build problems:Failed tests detected Failed tests
|
Depends on wildfly/wildfly-core#582 |
Linux with security manager Build 1199 is now running using a merge of 4fb1a29 |
Linux Build 6224 is now running using a merge of 4fb1a29 |
Windows Build 1336 is now running using a merge of 4fb1a29 |
Linux with security manager Build 1199 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 4fb1a29 |
Linux Build 6224 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 4fb1a29 |
Windows Build 1336 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 4fb1a29 |
@stuartwdouglas Label can be removed now |
.registerOverrideModel(deploymentMD.getDeploymentName(), new OverrideDescriptionProvider() { | ||
@Override | ||
public Map<String, ModelNode> getAttributeOverrideDescriptions(Locale locale) { | ||
return Collections.emptyMap(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is this on purpose? Override model with empty descriptions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yup, descriptions are added runtime later registering submodels. I haven't change how resources was registered in previous implementation, moving only them to new location and using PASSIVE service
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
tnx, was just making sure that was intentional.
Linux with security manager Build 1209 is now running using a merge of 8d13861 |
Windows Build 1346 is now running using a merge of 8d13861 |
Linux Build 6240 is now running using a merge of 8d13861 |
Linux with security manager Build 1209 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 8d13861 |
Windows Build 1346 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 8d13861 |
Linux Build 6240 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 8d13861 |
surpassed by #7605 |
No description provided.