This content has been marked as final.
Show 5 replies
-
1. Re: Transaction interceptor changes
heiko.braun Jun 19, 2009 7:10 AM (in response to heiko.braun)@Tom: Btw, if you would have kept the integration tests I did provide a while ago, this would have occurred in the nightly QA. So I'd say the current integration tests are insufficient.
-
2. Re: Transaction interceptor changes
heiko.braun Jun 19, 2009 7:12 AM (in response to heiko.braun)For completeness, here's the Deployer error:
Caused by: org.jbpm.api.JbpmException: couldn't lookup 'java:comp/UserTransaction' from jndi: UserTransaction not bound: UserTransaction not bound at org.jbpm.pvm.internal.tx.jta.JtaTransaction.lookupFromJndi(JtaTransaction.java:131) at org.jbpm.pvm.internal.tx.jta.JtaTransaction.lookupJeeUserTransaction(JtaTransaction.java:110) at org.jbpm.pvm.internal.tx.jta.JtaTransactionInterceptor.execute(JtaTransactionInterceptor.java:46) at org.jbpm.pvm.internal.svc.EnvironmentInterceptor.execute(EnvironmentInterceptor.java:54) at org.jbpm.pvm.internal.repository.DeploymentImpl.deploy(DeploymentImpl.java:91) at org.jbpm.integration.spi.DeploymentAdaptor.deploy(DeploymentAdaptor.java:62)
-
3. Re: Transaction interceptor changes
camunda Jun 19, 2009 7:15 AM (in response to heiko.braun)I already tackled that problem, but I saw I just send it to Tom via Mail and forgot the mailing list, sorry...
Here the JIRA issue for it: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBPM-2339 -
4. Re: Transaction interceptor changes
tom.baeyens Jun 23, 2009 3:40 AM (in response to heiko.braun)"heiko.braun@jboss.com" wrote:
@Tom: Btw, if you would have kept the integration tests I did provide a while ago, this would have occurred in the nightly QA. So I'd say the current integration tests are insufficient.
which ones are you referring to ? -
5. Re: Transaction interceptor changes
heiko.braun Jun 23, 2009 4:12 AM (in response to heiko.braun)A while ago I've commited a change to the samples that created .bar archives and deployed them through the deployer. something like this would have caught the problems in hudson already. Unfortunately you reverted that change.