I would leave it for the moment... Unless you are talking about integration
into the jbosscx module.
--jason
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, David Jencks wrote:
> Hi, I'm working on this rewriting. Should I change the package?? Seems
> like no, these are going to be sort of deprecated anyway, only there for
> backwards compatibility, so we should keep the package the same.
>
> Agreed?
>
> Thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> On 2001.07.26 18:48:54 -0400 Toby Allsopp wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 03:42:09PM -0700, Jason Dillon wrote:
> > > I am working on a build system proof of concept, that integrates cvs
> > modules
> > > as sources instead of binaries. Things are going well, but I have run
> > into
> > > a few module dependency issues. Currently there is only one that is
> > causing
> > > a problem.
> > >
> > > There is a circular dependency between jboss and jbosspool:
> > >
> > > 1) JDBCDataSourceLoader(jboss) depends on
> > JDBCPoolDataSource(jbosspool)
> > >
> > > 2) XADataSourceLoader(jboss) depends on XAPoolDataSource(jbosspool)
> > >
> > > I suggest moving the *Loader classes to the jbosspool module (with _no_
> > > package name changes) as the simple short-term solution to this
> > problem.
> >
> > That seems reasonable. The *DataSourceLoader MBeans should be rewritten
> > to be simple wrappers for ConnectionFactoryLoader, at which point they
> > should live in jbosscx.
> >
> > Toby.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
