On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 11:36 -0700, Brian Stansberry wrote: > Branching this discussion off, as I realize my > previous post forked a thread. > > --- Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 23:37 -0700, Brian Stansberry > > wrote: > > > A few semi-random points on parent-first vs. > > > parent-last classloading: > > > > > > 1) EJBs, EARs and other non-webapp J2EE > > deployments > > > typically use parent-first loading. I'd thought > > JBoss > > > offered a deployment descriptor option that > > allowed > > > the deployer to choose parent-last, but I was > > > mistaken. Too bad; I was hoping the scope of the > > "if > > > you want control, use parent-last classloading" > > > approach would apply. > > > > Well, if the EJB spec is designed to prevent EJBs > > from overriding jars > > present in the parent classloader, who are we to > > argue? > > > > Sorry, didn't "cross-pollinate" between a discussion I > was having on the JBoss forum and here. I briefly > looked at the J2EE and EJB specs and didn't see > anything that *required* parent-first. It really > doesn't say anything about it at all. A comment by > Scott Stark at JBoss implies the same. > > For the JBoss forum discussion, please see: > > http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=63520
i'd be interested to find out how the type conflict arises - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
