David Jencks wrote:
On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
Hi all,
When creating a connection pool and naming it in this from
"jdbc/something", the connection pool get created correctly.
When I check the available connectors however, this pool is listed as
"console.dbpool/jdbc%2Fsomething/1.0/rar". So, when I define a
dependency in a deployment plan I have to use "jdbc%2Fsomething"
instead of "jdbc/something"
I found 2 JIRAs (GERONIMO-2284 and GERONIMO-2314) mentioning the "%2F".
Is there any chance (or limitation) to use "%2F" only for creating the
directories in the repo but having Geronimo to understand the
requirement for a "/" in the dep plans instead of a "%2F"?
This is leading to confusion as I am able to create a data source with
a "/" in the name but not able to use it when referencing to the pool
from a plan.
I'm pretty sure we encode artifact names as uris all over the place so
we'd have to move the encoding into the uri creating/parsing code.
I'd be more tempted to prohibit "/" from artifactIds.
Note that this issue is about the name of the module/plugin, NOT the
name of the datasource gbean, which is what is used in persistence.xml
and jndi resource-ref setup configuration. There is no problem naming a
datasource jdbc/foo
That's the thing, if there is no problem naming a datasource jdbc/foo then
there should be no problem in referencing it.
As it is now, If I add a dependency to jdbc/foo in the dep plan it will
fail to deploy.
Not sure how we can get away naming a datasource jdbc/foo and not slamming
a "/" in the artifactId though.
Cheers!
Hernan
thanks
david jencks
Cheers!
Hernan
