David,
I think this is a great idea. However, I'm curious about the need for
the 1.4 specs in trunk. Do you envision this soon being replaced by a
JavaEE5 specs car? Should we just rename this now to be JavaEE5 and
then update the individual specs contained within it? Just curious on
+1
Thanks
Anita
--- Joe Bohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
I think this is a great idea. However, I'm curious about the need
for
the 1.4 specs in trunk. Do you envision this soon being replaced by
a
JavaEE5 specs car? Should we just rename this now to be JavaEE5 and
then
I think it would be cool to be able to build mixed 1.4/JEE5 assemblies
but I'm not clear on how to make that happen without creating a
proliferation of modules, configs, and assemblies. So I have been
working under the assumption that trunk is strictly for EE5 and that
any references to J2EE 1.4
Personally I'd prefer to move forward with Java EE 5.0. I think 1.4
assemblies would be nice but we have existing branches for that area
and based on user feedback that isn't an area that is really
interesting to them.
On Nov 29, 2006, at 12:20 PM, Paul McMahan wrote:
I think it would
On Nov 29, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Personally I'd prefer to move forward with Java EE 5.0. I think
1.4 assemblies would be nice but we have existing branches for that
area and based on user feedback that isn't an area that is really
interesting to them.
We're going to
David Jencks wrote:
We're going to have mixed assemblies for a while until we complete all
the ee 5 bits. I don't see any value in removing functionality from
our server before we have an ee5 replacement.
Is it possible to have mixed assemblies without changing components that
are
