That's right. We use the standard component pluggability model that relies on system properties to override the default adapter. I agree that it probably doesn't belong in axis.jar. However, I would like to see the third party directory created for all of the non-standard components from IBM/Sonic/etc. that could be plugged into Axis. This would also be useful for some of the new transport implementation like mail and jabber. Is this something slated for 1.1 or is it in a follow-on release. I would be willing to make the modifications for the JMS adapter if someone could handle the generic Ant work to set it up (I would do that too, but I'm not too great with Ant).
Thanks, Jaime -----Original Message----- From: Glen Daniels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:39 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution 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. > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------- > > >
