Hi Lin-Long,

the CVS trunk (OJB 1.x) is under development and is not recommended for use in production environment. We plan to release a first alpha/beta-release of OJB 1.x (the version could be e.g. 1.5 and will indicate that it is not 100% backward compatible with the OJB 1.0.x release branch) end of this year or beginning of 2006. If the 1.x API is stable the OJB Spring integration should be reworked (with OJB 1.x the OJB spring integration will be smoother).

The next upcoming version of OJB is 1.0.4 and will be generated by the OJB_1_0_RELEASE branch. Currently the OJB_1_0_RELEASE branch is 95% stable (3 fiddly bugs prevent us from releasing 1.0.4rc1, these bugs are included in 1.0.3 as well). Since 1.0.3 we did many bug fixes and improvements in OJB_1_0_RELEASE branch (bug fix notes will be added after code freeze).
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/db-ojb/release-notes.txt?rev=1.54.2.52&view=markup

The upcoming 1.0.4rc1 should be more stable than 1.0.3. So if you don't have deadline constraints in near future I would recommend to use 1.0.x branch and wait for the 1.0.4 release.

regards,
Armin


Shyu, Lin-Long wrote:
Hi,

   We are using spring and ojb 1.1.0 for our web application
development.   We found that the constructor and lookupConnection() in
ojb's connectionfactory classes have been changed. For example :
     public ConnectionFactoryManagedImpl(JdbcConnectionDescriptor jcd)

     public Connection lookupConnection() throws LookupException

 However, spring's    LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory still has the old
signature.

   public Connection lookupConnection(JdbcConnectionDescriptor jcd)
throws LookupException
This caused problem when we try to use LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory
as a connectionfactoryclass.

  Please let us know how  this new ojb connectionfactory to work with
spring's LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory.

Thanks.

Lin-Long


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to