Sounds like a good idea. Could you set up such a project structure?
The main problem with xa is that we can not suspend/resume with given the current implementation that relies on ReentrantReadWriteLock. Reason is that you can not transfer locks from one thread to another. I will investigate if this can be changed easily. For the time being I will add a new flavor of tx maps as I am no longer sure that there really is no use case for them. Oliver 2007/7/20, Joerg Heinicke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Oliver Zeigermann <oliver <at> zeigermann.de> writes: > I am proposing to strip Commons Transaction to its very core. > Deleted: > - no more XA classes: We really can not an implement an XA resource > with the existing implementation Hi Oliver, reducing ctx to a core is a good idea. I only would not like to see the XA stuff been dropped completely. I think it's quite important for getting ctx "sold". I have a second project in maven 2 sense in mind as commons jci does: http://marc.info/?l=jakarta-commons-dev&m=117571327222719&w=4. So we would have commons-transaction.jar and a commons-transaction-xa.jar. WDYT? Joerg --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
