{"shas":[["81b51ce78959d45254f9379de4d1cb22325898c8","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","adds swank as dev dep","Ben Mabey"],["b242fb8e33603aca6b241f0d2e991ae53239a06f","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","adds local-member wrapper fn","Ben Mabey"],["82869308672497c5852217aa53e01c4dfecbd31b","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","adds log4j as dev dep to prevent hazelcast logging from being sent to STDOUT\n\n(This is for apparatus's own tests only.)","Ben Mabey"],["475c4af2dde37b315d709f22eb116f763956253d","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","adds remote-future-call\n\nThe tests are currenly commented out because they are giving\nfalse-negatives.  I've manually tested remote-future-call and it works,\nbut for the test cases don't behave as I'd expect them to.  They\ndistributed tasks always seem to run on the same instance (the local\ninstance) even when specified not to.  When the members are in different\nJVMs it works fine (as I have tested manually), but for some reason\nHazelcast seems to treat all the local (respective to the JVM/process)\n members as the same.\n\nTo see remote-future-call in action I documented my manual test process\nin this screencast:\n\nhttp://screencast.com/t/B40gEVJP68r","Ben Mabey"],["bce20b687082515334cfa6f02615dfa61fde5650","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","notes on how to get owner of a key","Ben Mabey"],["34ca57840a6241e605f36c62af4b2cc3aefb25a7","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","allows for executor-service name to be specified in remote-future-call","Ben Mabey"],["d32c81d36fee2a605ee5d2bf3bf6f02228190cf1","73675debcd8a436be48ec22211dcf44fe0df0a64@benmabey.com","making release and changing group name to com.leadtune","Ben Mabey"]],"ref":"refs/heads/master","size":7,"head":"d32c81d36fee2a605ee5d2bf3bf6f02228190cf1","push_id":36619038}