On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 21:17, Robert Nicholson wrote:
Why does it have to be a MDB? Can't you just make a listener? What will
an MDB buy you?
In a word: transactions (oh also instance caching for tuning but that
would be more than 1 word :) )
We use a lot of MDBs in our app for these
boxed wrote:
The problem is not right or wrong, the problem is the pro's and
con's of the various approaches, and AFAICT the explicit approach has
some limitations, whereas the non-explicit approach has no limitations.
I can think of an example right now when the explicit solution is much more
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 08:30:17AM +0100, Rickard Öberg wrote:
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
Some points that people seem to be forgetting:
- Xwork is in the SANDBOX and is eXperimental (if you like the X for that)
- Nothing in Xwork can't be changed, these are ideas, prototypes
- Xwork will be
Can you explain? I'd like to know.
-Original Message-
From: Heng Sin Low [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 8:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Reflection
The multiple thread thing is simple/trivial to solve using
AOP. I'm not sure
-Original Message-
From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Why is it difficult? Whenever there's a thread disconnect you
just get
the state, and then re-set it when you want to restart the execution.
What exactly is the difficulty?
I'm not as familiar with the
After reading this for a while I cannot recall who asked for swing
clients in the first place. I don't think they were ever a requirement.
In terms of non web stuff I would like to see something that could talk
to JMS in an asynchronous manner but I'm not going to lose sleep if it's
outside the
-
From: Peter Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A plea - WAS Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
After reading this for a while I cannot recall who asked for
swing clients in the first place. I don't think they were
ever
Erik Beeson wrote:
Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence
removing web from the name. If new versions with strong web ties are
going to remain, shouldn't they remain under the original WebWork name?
That is something I wanted to gauge by my last couple of emails. I
What kind of real world example applications do you want? Wafer has a
working webwork example...
And docs? Who needs them - they're for people who aren't willing to roll
their sleeves up and dig directly into the code, right? (Note droll
humour.)
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Heng Sin Low wrote:
I
I think it might be beneficial to do both xwork and webwork as separate project
at this point of time. At least, people will spent less time debating at
mailing list and get things done. I guess there is no right or wrong here, it
is just that people have different preference and needs. For
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:24:26 +0100
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
Erik Beeson wrote:
Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence
removing web from the name. If new versions with strong web ties are
going to remain, shouldn't they remain
forking the
code base and splitting Xwork and Webwork, then I think we should roll it back and
discuss.
-Original Message-
From: matt baldree [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
I think
, January 12, 2003 1:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
I have been following this list for quite some time with
great interest. I really like all the new ideas for XWork. I
think it would be sad not to see those ideas become
implemented only because
Message -
From: Jason Carreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:04 AM
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Reflection
I'm not sure I see the disconnect here. What's so different about Xwork?
Views can still be JSP / Velocity / XSLT which generates HTML. It's still
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 08:24 AM, Rickard Öberg wrote:
So, given all of this, my resignation from XWork still holds. The
requirements that have been voiced the last few days are not mine, and
I don't think they're compatible with my goals, at least not without
serious compromises
, then this is a limitation that can be documented
and worked around.
Just my $0.02
Jason
-Original Message-
From: Robert Carlens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 1:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Reflection
I have been
16 matches
Mail list logo
