Hi David,Just one question. What was the rationale for the name of the branch for JTA
.../geronimo/specs/branches/geronimo-jta_1.1_spec-1.0
Why not .../geronimo/specs/branches/geronimo-jta-spec-1.1The spec is version 1.1. What does the 1.0 designation mean? And without doing the hard work, can you tell me what the artifact name is? Hopefully something that doesn't include the 1.0 designation...
Thanks, Craig On Dec 21, 2006, at 12:19 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Oct 27, 2006, at 8:38 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:When can Geronimo ship an upgrade to JTA 1.1 that we can use and compile with 1.3?These are "goodness" that I think OpenJPA can use.Ok, so it's taken me a while to get this done, but I've got our JTA 1.1 and JPA specs ready for release and up for vote.The JPA spec jar had some compliance issues which I fixed:http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-scm/200612.mbox/% [EMAIL PROTECTED]The JTA spec jar was fine.Assuming those votes pass, I'll publish them both and the JTA jar with jdk 1.3 as requested -- ensuring the "goodness" is locked in :)Also let me formally invite/encourage you all to vote:JTA vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/ 200612.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] JPA vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/ 200612.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]-David
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
