On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 23:30, Bruce Snyder wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Maas van den Berg said:
>
> MvdB>Just wanted to let you know that I've continued my braindead activities
> MvdB>and just finished typing in the JCA apis. Don't know if we need them but
> MvdB>they are here. I'll write some unittests and post the
> MvdB>stuff in a bit.
> MvdB>
> MvdB>Maas
> MvdB>
> MvdB>On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 23:34, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> MvdB>> What's the advantage to supporting JDBC through JCA? Is it
> that
> MvdB>> JCA requires logic to deal with associating with transactions and
> MvdB>> security, and if JDBC works through that we don't have to implement
> the
> MvdB>> same features twice? Or are there other considerations?
> MvdB>>
> MvdB>> Aaron
> MvdB>>
> MvdB>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, David Jencks wrote:
> MvdB>> > IMNSHO jdbc support should be through the JCA (connector) support
> and
> MvdB>> > jca-jdbc wrappers.
> MvdB>> >
> MvdB>> > I think jca should be a separate module ("connector")
> MvdB>> >
> MvdB>> > AFAIK the only specific communication with the ejb subsystem needed
> can
> MvdB>> > be provided by an interceptor that makes sure connection handles get
> MvdB>> > re-associated under the correct security context.
>
> Great, when you're finished, please send them to me and I'll get them
> checked in. Also, please make sure that you use the following version
> taglet in the class level Javadoc for all classes:
>
> @version $Revision$ $Date$
>
> Bruce
I'll will.
I should use the LICENSE with the tailing line comments stating 'hands
off etc...', instead of the version where these remarks are included
within ASF license block comment, right ?
Maas
