I was looking into it. So, the only place where we do any proxy creation stuff is in the JavassistProxyFactory class? If so, here's what I plan to do:
1. Rename the class. 2. Change the implementation to use Commons Proxy instead, perhaps the ProxyFactory used inside the logic should be looked up as a singleton just like we do elsewhere, so it can be configured? Thoughts? On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > I think that would be too much of a change for M4. > > But I definitely would like to have this for 1.0.0 :) > > This would completely remove us from the hardcoded javassist dependency, thus > integration into any kind of EE Application Server would really leverage from > it! > > Btw, thanks again for helping us on that, James! > > LieGrue, > strub > > --- James Carman <[email protected]> schrieb am Di, 23.2.2010: > >> Von: James Carman <[email protected]> >> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Release M4 >> An: [email protected] >> Datum: Dienstag, 23. Februar, 2010 13:27 Uhr >> Do you guys want the commons-proxy >> changes in M4? >> >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:35 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu >> <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi folks; >> > >> > I plan to release M4 this week. Please commit your >> recent changes that you >> > would like to include in M4 until Friday. We will >> freeze code on Friday >> > night and I will build a release at weekend. Probably >> VOTE on the release >> > will be at next Monday. >> > >> > Please do no commit __big__ changes to current code >> base that may cause to >> > cancel releasing. I will be tinkering on some minor >> changes. >> > >> > Thanks; >> > >> > --Gurkan >> > >> > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz > gegen Massenmails. > http://mail.yahoo.com >
