On Sep 30, 2004, at 3:28 PM, karan singh malhi wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
Since we would be adding a geronimo dd to the ear file, that means we
would be updating the .ear anyways, so why not modify the ejb-link in
the spec dd itself. If we are not allowed to modify the spec dd, then
should we be
Thanks Jeremy
On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 18:33, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> karan singh malhi wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply.
> >
> > Since we would be adding a geronimo dd to the ear file, that means we
> > would be updating the .ear anyways, so why not modify the ejb-link in
> > the spec dd itself. If w
karan singh malhi wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
Since we would be adding a geronimo dd to the ear file, that means we
would be updating the .ear anyways, so why not modify the ejb-link in
the spec dd itself. If we are not allowed to modify the spec dd, then
should we be allowed to modify the ear fil
Thanks for the reply.
Since we would be adding a geronimo dd to the ear file, that means we
would be updating the .ear anyways, so why not modify the ejb-link in
the spec dd itself. If we are not allowed to modify the spec dd, then
should we be allowed to modify the ear file. If not, then how are
On Sep 30, 2004, at 2:32 PM, karan singh malhi wrote:
I am not sure if the questions below are fully relevant.
Could you expand on this? Does this mean that if a packed application
needs to use an ejb from the .ear, then we would configure that in the
geronimo dd?
Either the geronimo dd or the spec
I am not sure if the questions below are fully relevant.
Could you expand on this? Does this mean that if a packed application
needs to use an ejb from the .ear, then we would configure that in the
geronimo dd? What if the packed application itself had the same ejb-link
value as you would enter in
Message:
A new issue has been created in JIRA.
-
View the issue:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-339
Here is an overview of the issue:
-
