Well the jUDDY Registry exception is bad for scout, so I think I will change it to Exception then. Does that sound ok?
--Kurt Steve Viens wrote: > I think I'd prefer RegistryException (or Exception) so there's not > compile time dependency on JAXR. > > Steve > > > On 1/4/07, *Kurt T Stam* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote: > > Scout should be able to connect to more then juddi.. > > > Anil Saldhana wrote: >> Why not the RegistryException from juddi? >> >> I do not think it is wise to have juddi being dependent on jaxr api. >> The others can comment on it. >> >> >> */Kurt T Stam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote: >> >> I just checked in code for JUDDI-90, embedded mode execution, >> and I have >> a question: >> >> Right now the classes in the org.apache.juddi.registry.local >> package >> throws a >> >> javax.xml.registry.RegistryException, >> >> which means that I added a dependency on the jaxr-api.jar >> (which I >> obtained from scout). In itself it seems like the right type of >> exception, but is everyone ok with adding the dependency to >> jaxr? I >> could simply be changed to 'Exception', and the jaxr >> dependency would go >> away. >> >> --Kurt >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >> http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/> >> > >
