1> readmes commit - I will wait and make it along with any other changes in JIRA-1698 as we are still deciding which sample to use to demo the feature of JIRA-1698
2> There are 3 test cases in ConnectionTests, please see if you find some other cases that can be included. 3> Using jboss jars - as these were available on mvn repo, I missed the point of license, if license is the issue, then these can not be used. TC has (default)BasicDataSource - which does not support getConnection(id, pwd) and PerUserPoolDataSource, SharedPoolDataSource - which support getConnection(id, pwd) When trying to configure PerUserPoolDataSource, SharedPoolDataSource with TC 6.0.14, was getting different errors, will see if can get this working. I am not doing any commits related to this JIRA, till 3> or some other sample is formed, so all changes will go together. Regards, Amita On Nov 6, 2007 11:06 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Comments inline : > > On 11/6/07, Amita Vadhavkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > changes done - > > > > 1) cleaned readme files using eclipse IDE html editor - samples, dbconfig > Good, Thanks, please committ this, you don't have to wait anymore :) > > > 2) replaced MySQL with Derby > Just want to make sure you have all the functionality you need in Derby... > > > 3) replaced sun provided JNDI jars with jboss jar - because - these are > > available in mvn repos and only 3 are required in the build path > > (jboss-common 3.2.3, jnp-client 4.0.2 and jnpserver 3.2.3 - total 350 KB) > > I downloaded the jars, but couldn't find any license files there. > Also, JBOSS stuff tend to be LGPL and that is not ASF Friendly, so > could you please point me to the proper license for these files ? > > > > 4) added more test cases in ConnectionTests.java and removed > > sample-dataSource > > 5) patch attached to JIRA-1698 > > > > Please see if there are any problems in the above, else I will commit the > > patch. > > The bin size increase due to jboss jars is 350 KB and so it may be OK to > > make it > > as test cases instead of sample. > > > > > Well, in summary, it's lots of dependencies issues to demonstrate we > now support authentication when retrieving the datasource > connection... and based on the dependencies being dragged to DAS > distro... I'm now inclined to have just a sample, or simpler, just > document in the User Guide. > > BTW, I'll play with this over the weekend and try to make this working > in TC with Companyweb... Maybe this is a simpler solution :) > > > > Regards, > > Amita > > > > On 11/5/07, Amita Vadhavkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I was trying to run the new DAS sample (dataSource) and I looks like > > > > it requires MySQL in order to run the sample, this might not be the > > > > best default configuration to require, as it requires lots of steps in > > > > order to just try the sample ( e.g install MySQL), and it also makes it > > > > difficult to test the sample during build. I'd like to suggest two > > > > things for our DAS Sample applications : > > > > > > > > - Use Derby as the default database in a sample application > > > > > > > > > Agree, done changes for this > > > > > > - Have a simple unit test to quickly check if the sample is working > > > > (use htmlUnit for webapp) > > > > > > > > > The jira has test cases for case which does not require external JNDI. > > > Which JNDI jar is available > > > as part of maven repo? I could not spot one and used sun's jars. As these > > > can not get downloaded > > > thru mvn build and need to be placed manually in the classpath, used > > > sample instead of junit for > > > testcase which requires JNDI. But if there is a maven repo based jar > > > providing JNDI, the sample > > > can be removed and instead junit cases can be added. Tried RootContext > > > from Geronimo but it is > > > read only. > > > > > > Also, I was wondering what we should use for demonstrating a specific > > > > feature... I guess we might not need a new sample for every new > > > > feature, this might increase the complexity of developing a new > > > > feature, I guess a test case might be good enough.... and a sample > > > > would be used more to demonstrate a bigger scenario or a how a set of > > > > features work together... > > > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Luciano Resende > > > > Apache Tuscany Committer > > > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende<http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > > > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Luciano Resende > Apache Tuscany Committer > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
