Wednesday, 2014-03-05

*** jbott <jbott!supybot@nat/redhat/x-fpikepeapyqnfzjp> has joined #jsr34606:09
*** mkouba <mkouba!~mkouba@redhat/jboss/mkouba> has joined #jsr34606:45
*** antoine_sd <antoine_sd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34607:33
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v antoine_sd07:33
*** maschmid <maschmid!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-lwyzopcvkkhffgfe> has joined #jsr34607:47
*** jbott <jbott!supybot@nat/redhat/x-mkuupwgqmpdulipn> has joined #jsr34607:55
*** maschmid <maschmid!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-lwyzopcvkkhffgfe> has quit IRC (*.net *.split)07:59
*** edburns <edburns!~edburns@inet-hqmc02-o.oracle.com> has quit IRC (*.net *.split)07:59
mkoubaantoine_sd: ping hi08:16
antoine_sdhi mkouba08:16
mkoubahave you read Christian's question on weld-dev?08:17
mkoubahttp://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/weld-dev/2014-March/003212.html08:17
antoine_sdwe are working on this. There's an issue08:18
antoine_sdlet me check08:18
antoine_sdCDI-39208:18
jbossbotjira [CDI-392] Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called [Coding In Progress (Unresolved) Clarification, Major, Mark Struberg] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-39208:18
mkoubaantoine_sd: this is not about BeanManager methods08:19
mkoubathe issue is a container event reference may escape08:19
antoine_sdok08:19
mkoubaand the extension may invoke some event method after initialization finished08:20
antoine_sdon could catch afterbeandiscovery for instance and use it later...08:20
mkoubayes, and it does not make sense imo08:24
mkoubamaybe we should state such invocation results in ISE08:24
mkoubabut it may brake some apps08:24
antoine_sdbut if these apps exist they don't work as expected today...08:26
antoine_sdso add this staement could be nice08:27
mkoubaagreed, at least we should discuss this on the next EG mtg08:28
antoine_sdAnyway I'm not very happy with how we describe the initialization process08:28
antoine_sd+108:28
antoine_sdif there is the same participant number we can do it right now ;-)08:29
mkoubaantoine_sd: hopefully there will be more participants next week... at least Jozef and Pete ;)08:31
antoine_sdI think it's a good idea to have a focus on the initialization process and container lifecycle mkouba. It's one of the most powerfull part of the spec and probably the one where most users make mistakes.08:37
*** jharting <jharting!jharting@redhat/jboss/jharting> has joined #jsr34608:37
*** 23LAAJEP2 <23LAAJEP2!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-chrydhrubqebcyfm> has joined #jsr34608:49
*** edburns <edburns!~edburns@inet-hqmc02-o.oracle.com> has joined #jsr34608:49
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34609:15
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg09:15
antoine_sdhi jharting, nice to see you back, hope you feel better.09:22
jhartingantoine_sd: hi, much better, thanks09:23
strubergjharting wazzup? got ill?09:41
antoine_sdhi struberg09:43
struberghiho antoine09:43
antoine_sdI'm reviewing https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/20709:43
jbossbotgit pull req [cdi] (open) mkouba CDI-422 Fix example for event qualifier types with members https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/20709:43
jbossbotjira [CDI-422] Wrong example for event qualifier types with members [Pull Request Sent (Unresolved) Bug, Minor, Martin Kouba] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-42209:43
antoine_sdsince mkouba switched 2 paragraphs in this PR, could be good to have one more reviewers09:44
strubergoki, will try to pull09:45
antoine_sdgreat thanks09:45
struberghmm the example looks ok09:48
strubergbut really hard to read09:48
strubergfull anonymous classes in 1 line is probably not an optimum ;)09:48
strubergwhy not make the RoleQualifier a full class and set the role as ct parameter?09:49
strubergthen the fire would look much more straight forward09:50
strubergloggedInEvent09:50
struberg is an Instance right?09:50
antoine_sd@Inject @Any Event<LoggedInEvent> loggedInEvent;09:52
strubergit's also confusing to me that the Role is a qualifier09:52
struberghmm ok09:52
strubergwait09:52
strubergI'm btw not sure about this09:54
strubergif the method really always gets invoked09:54
strubergpublic void afterLogin(@Observes LoggedInEvent event) { ... }09:54
strubergImo only for @Default09:54
strubergotherwise you would need to write09:54
strubergpublic void afterLogin(@Observes @Any LoggedInEvent event) { ... }09:54
strubergmkouba antoine_sd ping ^09:54
struberg@Any missing or am I missing something?09:54
antoine_sdI'm reading at the same time struberg09:55
strubergto make sure we look at the same thing09:55
struberghttps://github.com/mkouba/cdi/blob/817897da089d72ff8b45fce9136eb0903b8f1610/spec/events.asciidoc09:55
jbossbotgit [cdi] 817897d.. Martin Kouba CDI-422 Fix example for event qualifier types with members09:55
jbossbotjira [CDI-422] Wrong example for event qualifier types with members [Pull Request Sent (Unresolved) Bug, Minor, Martin Kouba] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-42209:55
mkoubastruberg: no, "The observer method has no event qualifiers or has a subset of the event qualifiers.09:56
mkouba"09:56
mkoubathis is in 10.2 Observer resolution09:56
mkoubaAn event is delivered to an observer method if:09:56
mkouba...09:56
mkoubastruberg: and no, you're not looking at the version from the PR09:57
mkoubastruberg: https://github.com/mkouba/cdi/blob/CDI-422/spec/events.asciidoc09:58
jbossbotjira [CDI-422] Wrong example for event qualifier types with members [Pull Request Sent (Unresolved) Bug, Minor, Martin Kouba] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-42209:58
antoine_sdthanks mkouba just learned something about observers ;)09:59
mkoubaantoine_sd: yw ;-)09:59
antoine_sdmkouba on line 39 perhaps you could remove without @Any at injection point since you introduce it on line 5910:01
*** maabaffy <maabaffy!maabaffy@nat/redhat/x-gupzskzxflhnzexm> has joined #jsr34610:03
strubergstill the same issue imo10:04
strubergThen the following observer method will always be notified of the event:10:04
strubergpublic void afterLogin(@Observes LoggedInEvent event) { ... }10:04
strubergthe Inject has @Any but you select a very specific one10:04
strubergwhich then only has @Role10:05
strubergthis gets fired10:05
strubergso the method above will not get triggered imo10:05
strubergbecause it just observes the @Default LoggedInEvent10:05
strubergbut NOT @Role LoggedInEvent10:05
strubergdifferent bean types10:05
strubergs/types/qualifiers/10:06
antoine_sdI propose we put our comments on the PR. wdyt10:06
antoine_sdit'll be easier for mkouba to track our remarks10:06
mkoubastruberg: it will be: "If the event parameter does not explicitly declare any qualifier, the observer method observes events with no qualifier."10:07
mkoubaantoine_sd: ok10:08
strubergbut that contradicts CDI-1.010:08
jbossbotjira [CDI-1] Clarify how resource producer fields (for persistence contexts) interact with transaction propagation [Resolved (Rejected) Clarification, Major, Pete Muir] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-110:08
strubergcompletely imo10:08
strubergthat would render @Any obsolete, right?10:08
strubergand you would get events which you would not get in CDI-1.010:08
jbossbotjira [CDI-1] Clarify how resource producer fields (for persistence contexts) interact with transaction propagation [Resolved (Rejected) Clarification, Major, Pete Muir] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-110:08
mkoubastruberg: this is already defined in 1.010:10
mkouba@Any is useful for normal injection points10:11
mkoubacontradicts what?10:11
antoine_sd"The Event interface provides a method for firing events with a specified combination of type and10:11
antoine_sdqualifiers"10:11
antoine_sdthe more I read this chapter the more I see errors regarding this non existing fire() method including qualifiers params10:12
antoine_sdanyway mkouba I find it more easy to read after "fire event" and "observer resolution" switch10:14
strubergew10:16
strubergre10:16
struberglet me read cdi 1.010:16
strubergmkouba nope, in cdi 1.0 it clearly stated10:18
struberg10.210:18
struberg•The observer method has all the event qualifiers. An observer method has an event qualifier if it has an observed event qualifier with (a) the same type and (b) the same annotation member value for each member which is not annotated @javax.enterprise.util.Nonbinding.10:18
strubergso firing without a written Qualifier -> @Default gets assumed10:18
struberg(standard @Default qualifier behaviour if not other qualifier is defined applies here)10:19
strubergwhich means if you DO fire an even with another special qualifier @Role10:19
strubergthan the method public void kickMe(@Observes LoggedInEvent lie) does NOT get invoked!10:19
strubergbut exactly this is assumed in the sample you pointed me to10:20
mkoubastruberg: I see, there must be some CDI 1.1 issue for this10:20
antoine_sdThe question is when and why we changed "The observer method has all the event qualifiers" to "The observer method has no event qualifiers"10:20
strubergfor the method kicMe to get invoked you would need to write10:20
strubergpublic void kickMe(@Observes @Any LoggedInEvent lie)10:21
strubergthe @Any is important here10:21
strubergchanging this would be a MAJOR incompatibility10:21
strubergimo10:21
strubergbut you got the point, right?10:21
antoine_sdI find it more logic struberg10:22
antoine_sdthe pb is that mkouba didn't change nothing here10:22
strubergouch10:22
antoine_sdit's already in 1.1 spec10:22
antoine_sd+110:22
strubergso we introduced the broken sample in cdi 1.1 already?10:22
strubergdamnit10:22
strubergwell, it's wrong anyway10:22
antoine_sdmore than a sample10:23
antoine_sdan error in the spec10:23
struberg:/10:23
antoine_sd"The observer method has no event qualifiers"10:23
antoine_sdin Observer resolution10:23
struberggosh, who introduced that?10:23
antoine_sddon't know10:23
strubergthat breaks "@Default is assumed when no qualifier is added"10:23
strubergwe should not do this10:23
strubergthis is what @Any is for...10:24
*** maabaffy <maabaffy!maabaffy@nat/redhat/x-gupzskzxflhnzexm> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)10:26
strubergdo you have a jira number for this change?10:27
strubergnot have that much time to look myself. daughter is keeping me busy ;)10:28
antoine_sdI'm looking10:28
antoine_sdit was before asciidoc switch apparently10:30
*** 23LAAJEP2 <23LAAJEP2!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-chrydhrubqebcyfm> has quit IRC (Quit: Ex-Chat)10:44
*** maschmid <maschmid!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-bxlvuryjmkvsbdgt> has joined #jsr34610:45
mkoubaantoine_sd: struberg: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-710:48
jbossbotjira [CDI-7] Section 10.2, bullet 3, first paragraph contradicts the rest of the section [Closed (Done) Bug, Blocker, Marius Bogoevici] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-710:48
*** maschmid <maschmid!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-bxlvuryjmkvsbdgt> has quit IRC (Read error: Operation timed out)10:52
antoine_sdyes got it commit bdf383410:52
strubergi see10:52
antoine_sdMay 12th 201110:52
antoine_sdhmmmm. what about RI behavior ?10:53
antoine_sdLet me do some tests10:56
struberg actually we still need both narrowing methods10:56
strubergthats an and/or question10:56
strubergI though that has been solved in another way10:57
strubergdid not see this commit10:57
strubergthought it is still narrowing10:57
strubergand if you need it wider then observe with @Any and inject the event meta info10:57
strubergwhere you can look if you are interested10:57
strubergbut obviously I am wrong10:58
mkoubaantoine_sd: we have a TCK 1.1 test for this10:59
mkoubaorg.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.event.observer.ObserverNotificationTest.testObserversNotified()10:59
mkoubahowever the TCK assertion does not equal to the spec wording:11:00
mkoubaCheck an event is delivered if the observer method belongs to an enabled bean, an event type is assignable to the observed event type and has a subset of the event qualifiers.11:00
mkoubabut there is an observer without qualifiers and check that this observer is notified for any set of qualifiers11:01
struberghmm fits the cdi 1.1 spec but is not backward compat to 1.0 :/11:04
antoine_sdyes11:04
antoine_sdI doesn't feel consistent11:05
*** mkouba <mkouba!~mkouba@redhat/jboss/mkouba> has quit IRC (Quit: Odcházím)11:06
*** maschmid <maschmid!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-fxgfamkpbbnwubza> has joined #jsr34611:08
antoine_sdI try to understand the real intention behind CDI-711:09
jbossbotjira [CDI-7] Section 10.2, bullet 3, first paragraph contradicts the rest of the section [Closed (Done) Bug, Blocker, Marius Bogoevici] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-711:09
strubergantoine this is pretty clear11:09
strubergyou have an event sender11:09
strubergwith @QualA and @QualB11:09
strubergin cdi 1.0 there was a necessity that the observer has the _exact_ same qualifiers11:09
strubergbut this does not solve all the needs11:10
antoine_sdI understand the subset need11:12
antoine_sdbut empty set is a very specific subset don't you htink ?11:13
strubergwell it's imo equal to @Any11:13
strubergthats what I don't understand11:13
antoine_sd+111:13
antoine_sdshould be @default11:13
antoine_sdto be consistent11:14
strubergor _any_ (not @Any) fitting qualifier11:14
strubergfire with @Role -> @Observes with @Any or with @Role and anything elese11:14
struberghitme(@Observes @Any )11:15
struberghitme(@Observes @Role @SomethingElse) would hit as well11:15
strubergbut hitMe(@Observes @SomethingElse) alone would not11:15
strubergane even @Observes @Default would not11:15
strubergthat would make sense to me11:16
strubergmkouba jharting any opinions?11:16
antoine_sdevent if we discovered that by working on CDI-422, it's not directly related and should be treated in its own ticket IMO.11:18
jbossbotjira [CDI-422] Wrong example for event qualifier types with members [Pull Request Sent (Unresolved) Bug, Minor, Martin Kouba] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-42211:18
strubergagree11:24
strubergmy personal opinion on this11:24
strubergeven though cdi 1.1 is released already11:24
strubergcdi 1.0 is still fare wider used11:24
strubergthere are no 'big' ee7 servers ready yet with the exception of wildfly11:24
strubergis wildfly already released?11:24
strubergand I don't coung GF4 here11:25
antoine_sdyes11:25
strubergdo you see many cdi 1.1 apps already?11:25
antoine_sdNo official numbers... But keep in mind that CDI is more and more used in Java SE11:27
antoine_sdso we sure have a significant CDI 1.1 users out there...11:27
antoine_sdusing Weld-SE or Weld-servlet...11:31
antoine_sdAnyway we should have a ticket IMO.11:34
antoine_sdto at least stress this difference with CDI 1.0.11:36
*** mkouba <mkouba!~mkouba@host-46-23-50-32.maxtel.cz> has joined #jsr34611:39
*** mkouba <mkouba!~mkouba@host-46-23-50-32.maxtel.cz> has quit IRC (Changing host)11:39
*** mkouba <mkouba!~mkouba@redhat/jboss/mkouba> has joined #jsr34611:39
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)11:41
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34611:47
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg11:47
*** antoine_sd is now known as asd_away11:51
*** asd_away <asd_away!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)11:52
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)11:57
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34612:07
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg12:07
*** antoine_sd <antoine_sd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34612:17
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v antoine_sd12:17
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)12:17
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34612:24
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg12:24
jhartingantoine_sd, struberg: sorry, I am back now12:49
strubergwb12:50
strubergdid you read the discussion?12:50
jhartingyes, I do not think there is a difference in behavior between CDI 1.0 and 1.1 wrt events12:52
jhartingin CDI 1.0 there was a conflict12:52
jhartingwhich was resolved by a clarification12:53
jhartingin CDI 1.1 the same behavior applies12:53
antoine_sdjharting there is significative difference in spec12:54
jhartingantoine_sd: sure, that is the conflict in 1.0 I was talking about12:55
jhartingthe CDI 1.0 wording allowed for two opposite interpretations12:55
jhartingit was later clarified, which one of those is the correct one12:56
jhartingand that one made it into CDI 1.112:56
strubergjharting ni cdi 1.0 there was no conflict12:58
strubergit was a straight 1:1 match12:59
antoine_sdsorry to insist jharting but "The observer method has all the event qualifiers" and "The observer method has no event qualifiers" looks like the opposite wording12:59
strubergbut that was not good enough for some folks12:59
jhartingstruberg: did you read the CDI-7 title?13:01
jbossbotjira [CDI-7] Section 10.2, bullet 3, first paragraph contradicts the rest of the section [Closed (Done) Bug, Blocker, Marius Bogoevici] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-713:01
jharting"contradicts the rest of the section" alone indicates some kind of conflict13:02
jhartingantoine_sd: yes, but CDI 1.0 also says: "An observer method will be notified of an event if the event object is assignable to the observed event type, and if all the observed event qualifiers are event qualifiers of the event"13:03
jhartingwhich is in conflict with what you quoted. This gave birth to CDI-713:04
jbossbotjira [CDI-7] Section 10.2, bullet 3, first paragraph contradicts the rest of the section [Closed (Done) Bug, Blocker, Marius Bogoevici] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-713:04
antoine_sdjharting I don't see the contradiction between what you quoted and "The observer method has all the event qualifiers"13:06
strubergjharting I see no contradiction neither13:10
strubergit was just that this is different to what some liked to have13:10
strubergand further down it was clarified that _both_ behaviours are sometimes good to have13:10
jharting"all the observed event qualifiers are event qualifiers of the event" means that observer qualifiers have to be a subset of event qualifiers13:11
jharting"The observer method has all the event qualifiers" means that event qualifiers have to be a subset of observer qualifiers13:11
strubergthat does still not contradict13:12
strubergif a not bigger b and b not bigger a13:12
strubergthen a==b13:12
struberga == b13:12
strubergthats no contradiction13:12
antoine_sdstruberg how does OWB behave regarding observer resolution ?13:13
strubergweirdly worded, but not a contradiction in the behaviour13:13
strubergI think it takes a perfect fit. But would need to check the code13:13
strubergI hacked this 4 years ago...13:13
jhartingstruberg: well, if the two sets are not equal then it is clearly a contradiction13:14
strubergthis strongly reminds me to the producer generics change13:15
strubergyes, it's oddly worded13:15
antoine_sdjharting from what you say I understand there is no different behavior between Weld 1.x and Weld 2.x regarding observer reslution13:15
strubergbut the new behaviour is now different what was in cdi 1.013:15
strubergwhich is imo not good13:15
antoine_sdIMO, if there is a real behavior difference we should a least stress it in the spec.13:18
antoine_sdI have to leave, back in 1h13:22
*** antoine_sd <antoine_sd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)13:22
*** antoine_sd <antoine_sd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34613:22
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v antoine_sd13:22
*** antoine_sd <antoine_sd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Client Quit)13:24
*** edburns <edburns!~edburns@inet-hqmc02-o.oracle.com> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)13:27
*** edburns <edburns!~edburns@inet-hqmc03-o.oracle.com> has joined #jsr34613:34
jhartingantoine_sd, struberg: no, CDI 1.0 was ambiguous and allowed for two different interpretations. Later it was clarified which of them was the right one. CDI 1.1 only allows for one.13:42
strubergjharting for the _new_ cdi 1.1 behaviour the @Observes @Any no longer makes any sense13:44
strubergand this was in almost every cdi sample13:44
strubergand is implemented tons of times13:44
strubergwill think about it in the afternoon13:45
strubergnot that I dont like the widening13:45
strubergbut it is something different than originally imposed by the spec13:45
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)13:56
*** agoncal <agoncal!~agoncal@APuteaux-553-1-116-80.w92-151.abo.wanadoo.fr> has joined #jsr34613:59
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34614:00
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg14:00
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34614:30
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd14:30
asdback14:30
mkoubaasd: hi Antoine, could you add 1.1.Final version to spec jira pls?14:37
mkoubaI've just created CDI-424 and would like to set "Affects Version" field14:38
jbossbotjira [CDI-424] Add validation of contextuals passed to a context object for a passivating scope [Open (Unresolved) Clarification, Major, Unassigned] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-42414:38
*** asd is now known as asd_away14:44
*** asd_away <asd_away!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)14:45
*** mkouba <mkouba!~mkouba@redhat/jboss/mkouba> has quit IRC (Quit: Odcházím)15:54
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34615:56
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd15:56
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)17:07
*** maschmid <maschmid!maschmid@nat/redhat/x-fxgfamkpbbnwubza> has quit IRC (Quit: Ex-Chat)17:16
*** asd is now known as asd_away17:26
*** asd_away <asd_away!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)17:29
*** agoncal <agoncal!~agoncal@APuteaux-553-1-116-80.w92-151.abo.wanadoo.fr> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)17:37
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34617:39
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg17:39
*** jharting <jharting!jharting@redhat/jboss/jharting> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)17:42
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34617:49
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd17:49
*** asd is now known as asd_away18:51
*** asd_away <asd_away!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)18:53
*** telnik <telnik!~telnik@193.106.31.224> has joined #jsr34618:56
*** agoncal <agoncal!~agoncal@APuteaux-553-1-116-80.w92-151.abo.wanadoo.fr> has joined #jsr34619:06
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34619:22
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd19:22
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)19:26
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)19:45
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34619:54
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd19:54
*** telnik <telnik!~telnik@193.106.31.224> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)19:55
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)20:00
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has joined #jsr34620:37
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v struberg20:37
*** struberg <struberg!~struberg@84-113-120-125.dynamic.surfer.at> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving.)21:43
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34621:57
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd21:57
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)22:01
*** agoncal <agoncal!~agoncal@APuteaux-553-1-116-80.w92-151.abo.wanadoo.fr> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)22:02
*** asd <asd!~antoine_s@redhat/jboss/antoinesd> has joined #jsr34623:59
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v asd23:59

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.9.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!