Hi,
I think that we should produce two artefacts as part of the assembly steps:
* geronimo-assembly-server: only the stuff for the server; and
* geronimo-assembly-deployer: only the stuff for the deployer.
This way is it more easy for end-users to understand what is actually
used by a geronimo
I totally agree with Gianny's suggestion.
From my personal experience, I have found that for a
newbie trying to differentiate between two could be
really difficult. So its better to produce two
artefacts for this.
Cheers,
Sandip
--- Gianny Damour [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
I think that we
Gianny Damour wrote:
Hi,
I think that we should produce two artefacts as part of the assembly steps:
* geronimo-assembly-server: only the stuff for the server; and
* geronimo-assembly-deployer: only the stuff for the deployer.
This way is it more easy for end-users to understand what is actually
I am interested.
Jeff
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Hi Geronimo Developers,
I shot an email out to the YourKit folks to see about getting a license
for their most excellent profiler. Seems like the are willing to give us
free licenses. Who interested, and would there be problem with dropping
a link to
Count me in too
Cheers,
Sandip
--- Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am interested.
Jeff
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Hi Geronimo Developers,
I shot an email out to the YourKit folks to see
about getting a license
for their most excellent profiler. Seems like the
are willing
me 2
-dain
On Mar 22, 2005, at 9:07 AM, Sandip Ghayal wrote:
Count me in too
Cheers,
Sandip
--- Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am interested.
Jeff
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Hi Geronimo Developers,
I shot an email out to the YourKit folks to see
about getting a license
for their most excellent
I am also interested.
Thanks,
Gianny
Hiram Chirino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Geronimo Developers,
I shot an email out to the YourKit folks to see about getting a license
for their most excellent profiler. Seems like the are willing to give
us free licenses. Who interested, and
