Well, I agree with you. I don't think you should need to build from source to use third-party stuff. But nor do I think we should have any in axis.jar.
I haven't really looked at the JMS transport stuff yet, but I'm assuming that there's just a setting (engine property / system property /etc) which determines the actual vendor-JMS-interface class to use. So you should just be able to pull down a separate sonic-axis-transport.jar (or something), drop that in your classpath, and set the property in your server-config.wsddd/client-config.wsdd. Jaime / Dave, is that about how it works? If so, we just need an axis/dist/third-party directory so people can pick up the custom jars for stuff like this. --Glen > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution > > > > > So out of the box Axis can't be used with any specific JMS > implementations? > This seems like it would impede adoption. > > If I have to build from source, does that mean using a > nightly build? For > many of us working in the stodgy, old financial services industry that > means we won't be able to use it - using nightly build stuff > in production > is frowned on. > > As a user, I'd prefer that I could download and use something > out of the > box - assuming I have the third party jars I need already. > > For example, I've got weblogic here and am using Weblogic JMS > for other > apps. If there were a JMS adapter for weblogic, I'd prefer to > use it out of > the box and just make sure the weblogic JMS classes were on > the classpath. > Ideally, there would be 'stable builds' that would contain > the classes I > needed already compiled. > > Does that make sense? > > > > > > > > > > Glen Daniels To: > "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: (bcc: > Kevin Bedell/Systems/USHO/SunLife) > > 01/06/2003 03:25 PM Subject: RE: > JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution > > Please respond to axis-dev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Correct. Generic JMS stuff is OK to have in the JAR, but any > vendor-specific stuff like Sonic/IBM/etc is not, at least as > far as I'm > concerned. Other opinions? > > --Glen > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jaime Meritt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:24 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution > > > > > > Glen, > > > > Great, thanks a lot for the help. To get the > SonicMQVendorAdapter to > > build you will need the SonicMQ client jars available as > > well. What is > > the current policy on third party library dependencies? Does > > the binary > > distribution include all options or just the default > packages? If it > > includes all options, I can send you Sonic client libraries > for build > > purposes. If not, I am assuming the solution is to have users build > > from the source distribution. > > > > Thanks, > > Jaime > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 2:14 PM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution > > > > > > Actually, I did (JRun's), and have no idea why it wasn't in there. > > > > I'll rebuild and repost, though, as beta2. We should get 1.1 up to > > speed and out soon! > > > > --Glen > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom Jordahl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 2:11 PM > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution > > > > > > > > > Jaime, > > > > > > The release builds are built by the release manager (in > > > 1.1beta1, that was Glen) and this person has to have all of > > > the jar files around to get the right build thing to happen. > > > > > > My guess is that Glen did NOT have a JMS jar on his system > > > when building 1.1. > > > > > > -- > > > Tom Jordahl > > > Macromedia Server Development > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jaime Meritt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 1:24 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just got an email from a user alerting me to the fact > that the JMS > > > transport classes are not included in the binary > > distribution for the > > > Axis 1.1 beta. It is however available in the source > > > distribution. Can > > > anyone shed some light on this? I would imagine that the > > JMS classes > > > were unavailable when the distribution was built. Who can > > modify the > > > build classpath? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Jaime > > > --- > > > Jaime Meritt > > > Manager, Software Engineering > > > Sonic Software Corporation > > > 400 Technology Square > > > Progress Software Suite > > > Cambridge, MA 02139 > > > Phone: 617-551-6613 > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------- > This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is > intended for the use > of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain > information that is privileged, proprietary , confidential > and exempt from > disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are > notified that > any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is > strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication > in error, > please notify the sender and erase this e-mail message immediately. > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------- > > >
