On 15/07/2012 01:38, Phil Steitz wrote: > Sorry if this has been discussed already and I can't find the > thread; but we should do this now if we want to do it - i.e., move > DBCP's AbandonedObjectPool into [pool].
This is certainly something that - on the face of it - makes sense. However, when I looked at it a little while back it did not appear to be trivial to unpick the AbandonedObjectPool code from DBCP. I didn't spend enough time on it to come to a final conclusion. I can look at this in the next week or so. It would be helpful if other folks looked as well. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
