I think that's fine.
On 1/4/07, Kurt T Stam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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]> 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]> <[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] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > >
