like we might have to figure out some clever way to support both.
>
> -David
>
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Active-MQ-5.1-support-tp19400471p19519440.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sep 16, 2008, at 6:51 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
Hi David,
From my point of view, it's not possible to switch from 4.1.x to 5.1.x
without any change in OpenEJB.
In the current openejb-core module, the OpenEjbBrokerFactory
implements
BrokerFactory.BrokerFactoryHandler but in the Activ
.apache.org/repo/m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository/org/apache/activemq/activeio-core/3.1.0/activeio-core-3.1.0.jar
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository/org/apache/camel/camel-core/1.3.0/camel-core-1.3.0.jar
>>
>> The activeio-core pom lists backport-util-concurrent as a dependency,
>> but I couldn't find any use of it in their source. I'd try getting by
>> without it.
>>
>> Definitely let us know how it goes.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Active-MQ-5.1-support-tp19400471p19513877.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
it in their source. I'd try getting by
> without it.
>
> Definitely let us know how it goes.
>
> -David
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Active-MQ-5.1-support-tp19400471p19512712.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> The activeio-core pom lists backport-util-concurrent as a dependency,
> but I couldn't find any use of it in their source. I'd try getting by
> without it.
>
> Definitely let us know how it goes.
>
> -David
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Active-MQ-5.1-support-tp19400471p19512302.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ache.org/repo/m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository/org/apache/camel/camel-core/1.3.0/camel-core-1.3.0.jar
>
> The activeio-core pom lists backport-util-concurrent as a dependency,
> but I couldn't find any use of it in their source. I'd try getting by
> without it.
>
> Definitel
On Sep 15, 2008, at 3:45 PM, rde8026 wrote:
I'm using the standard lib form a zip file...
Ok. In terms of general library upgrading, we generate two files
(dependencies.xml and dependencies.txt) that we put inside of every
openejb-*.jar that says what dependencies the jar has. The data
ssible, though I'm not sure if anyone has tried.
>
>> If so what does it take to make this change.
>
> Are you in maven or are you using the lib directory of a standalone
> zip/tar?
>
> -David
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/A
On Sep 9, 2008, at 1:25 PM, rde8026 wrote:
Is it possible to use active mq 5.1 with the openejb container
rather than
4.1?
It should be possible, though I'm not sure if anyone has tried.
If so what does it take to make this change.
Are you in maven or are you using the lib directory o
Is it possible to use active mq 5.1 with the open ejb container rather than
4.1?
If so what does it take to make this change.
Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Active-MQ-5.1-support-tp19400471p19400471.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list
10 matches
Mail list logo