OK, I will backport it to 3.2 (not sure about doing it for 3.0) > -----Message d'origine----- > De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de > Scott M Stark > Envoyé : jeudi, 9 janvier 2003 09:23 > À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Objet : Re: Scott? RE: [JBoss-user] RE: [Beanshell-users] Re: > [JBoss-dev] ANNOUNCE: BeanShell JBoss sub-deployer in HEAD > > > Seems like a rather independent feature that can't cause any > harm. 3.2 is fine as > is 3.0 as long as there truly are no backward compatibility > issues with existing > services. > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Scott Stark > Chief Technology Officer > JBoss Group, LLC > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sacha Labourey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Scott M Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Adam Heath" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jboss-Dev" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 11:48 PM > Subject: Scott? RE: [JBoss-user] RE: [Beanshell-users] Re: > [JBoss-dev] ANNOUNCE: BeanShell JBoss sub-deployer in HEAD > > > > Scott, > > > > Do you accept the beanshell sub-deployer in pre-HEAD branches? 3.2? 3.0? > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Sacha > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
