Hi Marc:
Is posible to fix that? I mean by keeping compatibility in our mocks for both versions. If this is not posible then we need to states clearly wich version we will use. WDYT? Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo. On Jue, 20 de Enero de 2005, 15:06, Marc Portier dijo: > coincidence: was on the exact same path yesterday :-) > (but about the related mail.jar) > > however I also noticed something to be warned about: > I noticed the mock InternetAddress constructor forgets about declaring > to throw an AddressException (maybe others, maybe equal issues at other > locations ) > > I noticed while recompiling against the non-mock and getting some > compiler errors > > what I'm worried about though is that people developing/compiling > against the mocks will get into unpleasant deployment issues having no > catch/declare statements for those if their code only meets the real > classes in the deploy environment. > > kind regards, > -mac= > > Ralph Goers wrote: >> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote: >> >>> we are currently getting ParanoidCocoonServlet to work with unexploded >>> WARs (in order to deploy javaflow on BEA Weblogic). this requires >>> replacing the getRealPath() calls with getResourcePaths(). >>> >>> unfortunately, that method is only available in servlet 2.3, and >>> cocoon still ships with 2.2 in lib/core (and 2.3 in lib/optional) >>> >>> is it planned to move to servlet 2.3? >>> >>> the presence of the 2.3 lib and the 2.3 doctype in web.xml seem to >>> indicate it. compiling with servlet 2.3 didn't cause problems for me, >>> and any reasonably recent servlet container already runs cocoon under >>> 2.3 anyway. >>> >> For compatibility, Cocoon 2.1.x will remain at JDK 1.3 and Servlet 2.2. >> Cocoon 2.2 will use JDK 1.4 and Servlet 2.3. >> >> HTH >> Ralph >> > > -- > Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/ > Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center > Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
