On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 21:52 +0200, Remy Maucherat wrote: > William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > I have no foreseeable solution to building that jar on Gentoo at this > > time. I have discussed it extensively with others, and we are likely to > > have to do some package specific hacks or etc to build that jar. In the > > mean time, those needing that jar are having to fetch it from the a > > binary release. > > Ok, but you don't really have to care that much about that JAR: Tomcat > is still perfectly usable using the regular commons-dbcp, etc.
Sure, and most JDBC drivers have their own factories as well. It's just users freak at first and is one of the little annoying pains. I have never been effected by it missing, but many that don't specify a factory at all. Tend to need that jar, since it's the default factory used when non are specified. Really only reasons I care about the jar is 1. To be like upstream releases (for the most part) 2. So users don't get cnfe or etc when the jar is mia > It's not the same situation here, so you won't run into any problem. An > implementation of commons-logging (I thought the one Costin did in > tomcat-lite could be reasonable to start with) would be included in the > Tomcat source and built along with the rest. Terrific :) I have no problem with any sources bundled with Tomcat. Nor Tomcat's deps on binaries the sources do not ship with. It's just dependencies on sources Tomcat does not ship with is my pain/gripe atm. I appreciate you all being receptive to this coming from downstream :) -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo/Java
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
