-
1. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 23, 2007 8:20 AM (in response to rg64)Specifically, I would like to see at least Apache Servicemix SVN revision http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=583701 applied to FUSE ESB (JIRAs cxf bc provider and test shows how it works add locationURI for cxf bc provider). The CXF-BC appears to be quite broken without at least these patches. If you could incorporate SVN revision http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=585869 to enable full attachment support, that would be even better.
- Ron
-
2. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
bsnyder Dec 25, 2007 10:14 AM (in response to rg64)The next major release of the FUSE ESB is going to pull in all of the major changes. That release will be available in Q1 2008.
Bruce
-
3. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 25, 2007 7:08 PM (in response to bsnyder)Any suggestions for a cxf-bc provider work-around until then?
- Ron
-
4. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
bsnyder Dec 27, 2007 9:56 AM (in response to rg64)In the meantime I will deploy a SNAPSHOT of servicemix-3.3.1 so you could start using it. The version will be servicemix-3.3.1-SNAPSHOT. This process usually takes a few hours minimum so I'll follow up here when this deployment has been completed.
Bruce
-
5. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 27, 2007 12:10 PM (in response to bsnyder)Hi Bruce,
Thanks for the support. I'll look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
- Ron
Edited by: rgavlin on Dec 27, 2007 12:09 PM
-
6. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
bsnyder Dec 28, 2007 1:45 AM (in response to rg64)OK, servicemix-3.3.1-SNAPSHOT has been deployed and it is available here:
Note that this is a SNAPSHOT build of the FUSE ESB from the Subversion repository today and it has not yet been fully tested. This SNAPSHOT build is for testing purposes only and could be updated and redeployed at any time.
Bruce
-
7. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 28, 2007 7:42 AM (in response to bsnyder)Hi Bruce,
Thanks much for making this happen. Are you able to describe the "contents" of this 3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT release? It appears it includes at least CXF-SE enhancement SM-1077 and CXF-BC enhancements SM-1086, 1088, and SM-1109. Does it bring the CXF-SE and CXF-BC components in sync with Apache ServiceMix 3.2, 3.2.1, or even something later?
What about these changes required a completely new 3.3.1 release rather than simply a new 3.3.0.x release? Was it the interface changes to org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.CxfBcProvider and org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeProxyFactoryBean?
Am I "safer" using this entire release intact or would you recommend I deploy servicemix-cxf-bc-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT-installer.zip and servicemix-cxf-se-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT-installer.zip to an existing, 3.3.0.6-based release?
Were any new Maven dependencies added for this release or should my offline 3.3.0.6-based Maven repository be sufficient to build this release from source?
Will the Q1 2008 release be a 3.3.1 release or something like 3.4? Do you know what versions of Apache ServiceMix, Apache CXF, and Apache Camel will compose this release? Will this be an early or late Q1 release?
Thanks again,
- Ron
-
8. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
bsnyder Dec 28, 2007 12:55 PM (in response to rg64)Thanks much for making this happen. Are you able to describe the "contents" of this 3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT release? It appears it includes at least CXF-SE enhancement SM-1077 and CXF-BC enhancements SM-1086, 1088, and SM-1109. Does it bring the CXF-SE and CXF-BC components in sync with Apache ServiceMix 3.2, 3.2.1, or even something later?
As stated previously, this is a cut from the FUSE ESB 3.3.1 branch of the Subversion repository. This SNAPSHOT is equivalent to a nightly build and has not yet been fully tested. This release is in line with the Apache ServiceMix trunk to it's a step ahead of the Apache ServiceMix project releases. We have not yet compiled the list of changes that are included. This will take place when the full release of this version occurs sometime in Q1 2008.
What about these changes required a completely new 3.3.1 release rather than simply a new 3.3.0.x release? Was it the interface changes to org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.CxfBcProvider and org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeProxyFactoryBean?
There are a lot of changes to the Apache ServiceMix trunk since the FUSE ESB was last sync'd with it, so the minor version was incremented instead of just another minor.minor increment.
Am I "safer" using this entire release intact or would you recommend I deploy servicemix-cxf-bc-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT-installer.zip and servicemix-cxf-se-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT-installer.zip to an existing, 3.3.0.6-based release?
I wouldn't recommend that you use this release for anything other than experimental development. I.e., do not deploy a SNAPSHOT release to a production environment. You could certainly try to use those 3.3.1 JBI components in the 3.3.0.6 release for experimental development, but YMMV (your mileage may vary).
Were any new Maven dependencies added for this release or should my offline 3.3.0.6-based Maven repository be sufficient to build this release from source?
I don't recall any new Maven dependencies being explicitly added but there could certainly be some as updates to core Maven plugins as this takes place all the time. Your offline Maven repository from 3.3.0.6 probably won't work 100% because of the new versions of other FUSE components which pull in newer versions of transitive dependencies. Chances are you will need to update your copy of the Maven repository.
Will the Q1 2008 release be a 3.3.1 release or something like 3.4? Do you know what versions of Apache ServiceMix, Apache CXF, and Apache Camel will compose this release? Will this be an early or late Q1 release?
The Q1 2008 release will be this version after it has been more fully tested. We always try to use the Apache ServiceMix trunk as much as possible for the FUSE ESB. This particular SNAPSHOT release is using the FUSE Services Framework 2.0.2.3-fuse (Apache CXF) and the FUSE Mediation Router 1.3.0.0-fuse (Apache Camel). The latest version of the FUSE Services Framework was not used due to compilation issues that need some time to be worked out. Also, I'm currently redeploying the FUSE ESB SNAPSHOT to use the latest release of the FUSE Mediation Router. I really don't know the exact timeframe for the next release other than our commitment to offering four major releases throughout the year for each product in the FUSE family.
Bruce
-
9. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 29, 2007 10:14 AM (in response to bsnyder)Hi Bruce,
I am trying to run the tests with the new 3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT build using WinXP SP2 w/Sun JDK 1.5.0_14. I get the following error compiling the Core tests. Any suggestions?
Ron
C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core>mvn test
Setting property: classpath.resource.loader.class => 'org.codehaus.plexus.velocity.ContextClassLoaderResourceLoad
er'.
Setting property: velocimacro.messages.on => 'false'.
Setting property: resource.loader => 'classpath'.
Setting property: resource.manager.logwhenfound => 'false'.
**************************************************************
Starting Jakarta Velocity v1.4
Default Properties File: org\apache\velocity\runtime\defaults\velocity.properties
Default ResourceManager initializing. (class org.apache.velocity.runtime.resource.ResourceManagerImpl)
Resource Loader Instantiated: org.codehaus.plexus.velocity.ContextClassLoaderResourceLoader
ClasspathResourceLoader : initialization starting.
ClasspathResourceLoader : initialization complete.
ResourceCache : initialized. (class org.apache.velocity.runtime.resource.ResourceCacheImpl)
Default ResourceManager initialization complete.
Loaded System Directive: org.apache.velocity.runtime.directive.Literal
Loaded System Directive: org.apache.velocity.runtime.directive.Macro
Loaded System Directive: org.apache.velocity.runtime.directive.Parse
Loaded System Directive: org.apache.velocity.runtime.directive.Include
Loaded System Directive: org.apache.velocity.runtime.directive.Foreach
Velocimacro : initialization starting.
Velocimacro : adding VMs from VM library template : VM_global_library.vm
ResourceManager : unable to find resource 'VM_global_library.vm' in any resource loader.
Velocimacro : error using VM library template VM_global_library.vm : org.apache.velocity.exception.ResourceNotFo
undException: Unable to find resource 'VM_global_library.vm'
Velocimacro : VM library template macro registration complete.
Velocimacro : allowInline = true : VMs can be defined inline in templates
Velocimacro : allowInlineToOverride = false : VMs defined inline may NOT replace previous VM definitions
Velocimacro : allowInlineLocal = false : VMs defined inline will be global in scope if allowed.
Velocimacro : initialization complete.
Velocity successfully started.
checkstyle:checkstyle {execution: validate}
Audit done.
pmd:check {execution: validate}
xbean:mapping {execution: default}
log4j:WARN No appenders could be found for logger (org.apache.xbean.spring.generator.QdoxMappingLoader).
log4j:WARN Please initialize the log4j system properly.
Generating META-INF properties file: C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\targe
t\xbean\META-INF\services\org\apache\xbean\spring\http\servicemix.apache.org\config\1.0 for namespace: http://servicemix
.apache.org/config/1.0
Generating Spring 2.0 handler mapping: C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\tar
get\xbean\META-INF\spring.handlers for namespace: http://servicemix.apache.org/config/1.0
Generating Spring 2.0 schema mapping: C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\targ
et\xbean\META-INF\spring.schemas for namespace: http://servicemix.apache.org/config/1.0
Generating HTML documentation file: C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\target
\xbean\servicemix.xsd.html for namespace: http://servicemix.apache.org/config/1.0
Generating XSD file: C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\target\xbean\servicem
ix.xsd for namespace: http://servicemix.apache.org/config/1.0
Generating WIKI documentation file: C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\target
\xbean\servicemix.xsd.wiki for namespace: http://servicemix.apache.org/config/1.0
build:copy {execution: default}
Using default encoding to copy filtered resources.
Nothing to compile - all classes are up to date
Using default encoding to copy filtered resources.
Compiling 83 source files to C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\target\test-c
lasses
C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\src\test\java\org\apache\servicemix\client\Remote
ServiceMixClientTest.java:[30,40] cannot find symbol
symbol : variable servers
location: class org.apache.activemq.transport.vm.VMTransportFactory
C:\Apps\apache-servicemix-3.3.1-fuse-SNAPSHOT\src\core\servicemix-core\src\test\java\org\apache\servicemix\client\Remote
ServiceMixClientTest.java:[30,40] cannot find symbol
symbol : variable servers
location: class org.apache.activemq.transport.vm.VMTransportFactory
For more information, run Maven with the -e switch
Total time: 1 minute 40 seconds
Finished at: Sat Dec 29 10:06:35 EST 2007
-
10. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
bsnyder Dec 29, 2007 7:05 PM (in response to rg64)Yeah I'm not surprised. I skipped all the tests in order to get the SNAPSHOT deployed via the system property named maven.test.skip. As I said, this is simply a SNAPSHOT (equivalent to a quick nightly build of the servicemix-3.3.1-fuse branch) and not fully tested. It looks like we need to address the compilation of this test.
Bruce
-
11. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 30, 2007 12:38 AM (in response to bsnyder)Hi Bruce,
In order to fix this particular problem, change the "VMTransportFactory.servers" reference to "VMTransportFactory.SERVERS" in the tearDown() method of core\servicemix-core\src\test\java\org\apache\servicemix\client\RemoteServiceMixClientTest.java. The test compiles and executes correctly with this modification.
Best regards,
Ron
-
12. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 30, 2007 1:31 AM (in response to bsnyder)Bruce,
One of the CxfSe test is failing in this build. This test exercises the CxfSe client proxy feature that we are interested in using.Here is the information about the failing test.
-
Test set: org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeClientProxyTest
-
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.91 sec <<< FAILURE
testClientProxy(org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeClientProxyTest) Time elapsed: 6.66 sec <<< ERROR
java.lang.NullPointerException
at org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeClientProxyTest.getServiceUnitPath(CxfSeClientProxyTest.java:98)
at org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeClientProxyTest.testClientProxy(CxfSeClientProxyTest.java:68)
at org.apache.servicemix.cxfse.CxfSeClientProxyTest.testClientProxy(CxfSeClientProxyTest.java:68)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
at junit.framework.TestCase.runTest(TestCase.java:154)
at junit.framework.TestCase.runBare(TestCase.java:127)
at junit.framework.TestResult$1.protect(TestResult.java:106)
at junit.framework.TestResult.runProtected(TestResult.java:124)
at junit.framework.TestResult.run(TestResult.java:109)
at junit.framework.TestCase.run(TestCase.java:118)
at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:208)
at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:203)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit.JUnitTestSet.execute(JUnitTestSet.java:213)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.suite.AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.executeTestSet(AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.java:138)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.suite.AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.execute(AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.java:163)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.Surefire.run(Surefire.java:84)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.SurefireBooter.runSuitesInProcess(SurefireBooter.java:261)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.SurefireBooter.main(SurefireBooter.java:875)
Also, a couple CxfBc tests appear broken. These broken tests are:
org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest.txt
Tests run: 24, Failures: 12, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 280.283 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayAnonymousAcks(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 20.2 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayDeferredAnonymousAcks(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 20.279 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayDeferredNonAnonymousAcks(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 17.515 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayAnonymousAcksSequenceLength1(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 16.654 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayAnonymousAcksSuppressed(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 8.823 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayAnonymousAcksSuppressedAsyncExecutor(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 8.332 sec <<< FAILURE!
testTwowayNonAnonymousMaximumSequenceLength2(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 11.446 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayMessageLoss(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 15.032 sec <<< FAILURE!
testOnewayMessageLossAsyncExecutor(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 15.783 sec <<< FAILURE!
testTwowayNonAnonymousNoOffer(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 15.302 sec <<< FAILURE!
testMultiClientOneway(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 17.115 sec <<< FAILURE!
org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.security.CxfBCSecurityTest.txt
testTerminateOnShutdown(org.apache.servicemix.cxfbc.ws.rm.CxfBcRMSequenceTest) Time elapsed: 15.121 sec <<< FAILURE!
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 162.293 sec <<< FAILURE!
Any thoughts?
Ron
-
13. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Dec 30, 2007 8:05 PM (in response to bsnyder)Hi Bruce,
FYI, all the EIP JmsFlow and Tx tests seem to be failing in this build. BTW, do you plan to keep improving this build until you reach a stable version which will become the 3.3.1 delivery? Or do you expect 3.3.1 to include newer versions of ActiveMQ, CXF, or Camel than the ones included in this build?
Ron
-
14. Re: servicemix-cxf-bc cxfbc:provider broken 3.3.0.6-fuse version
rg64 Jan 1, 2008 2:11 AM (in response to bsnyder)Hi Bruce,
So, it looks like this build has ActiveMQ 4.x vs. ActiveMQ 5.x issues. The FUSE ESB 3.3.0.x codebase has updates to work specifically with ActiveMQ 5.x. This 3.3.1.0 release appears to be missing those updates.
For example, the RemoteServiceMixClientTest.java included in FUSE ESB 3.3.0.0 was specifically updated to work with ActiveMQ 5.x (See my other post about the specifics). The version of RemoteServiceMixClientTest.java in this 3.3.1.0 has not been updated accordingly. In order to get this build working, the same ActiveMQ updates that were applied to the 3.3.0.x tree will need to be applied to this tree. Is that something doable in the short term?
Let me know.
Ron