David Jencks wrote: > So this requires an explicit undeploy of the old jar: it cannot work via an > autodeployer watching for changed timestamps, because you have to undeploy > the file first before you can change it.
Correct, I was mainly thinking about the locking of the copied file, which is a pain right now (it doesn't get cleaned up). > You sure this is better than > copying? Copying would still be used, but at least the copy can have the same name, and always be removed on undeploy. With explicit deployment (described in previous reply to Marc) there would be no locking. /Rickard -- Rickard Öberg _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
