I did this while in process of doing checkin. Should be fixed in a minute.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 2:34 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [JBoss-dev]
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version "1.3.1_06"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standar
Agreed. I don't want that management headache propagated to 4.0.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003
Make that 4 cheers!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom
Elrod
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Is JDK 1.4 required to build
3 cheers for Scott!
--
Bugs item #629145, was opened at 2002-10-26 19:14
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=629145&group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: None
>Status: Open
Resolution: Accepted
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Stefan Wachter (stefanwachter)
Assigned to: Chr
I got no problem making 99% of CMP working on 1.3 (basicially anything
that does not require JDBC3). It is just the #ifdef stuff I hate.
-dain
On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 10:49 PM, Scott M Stark wrote:
Originally I said I thought we needed to keep 4.0 buildable by JDK 1.3,
but I'm starting t
There's no requirement from JMX to use 1.4 yet.
(excluding JSR160/Remoting)
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Scott M Stark wrote:
> Originally I said I thought we needed to keep 4.0 buildable by JDK 1.3,
> but I'm starting to think otherwise. I'm about to give in to this demand.
> If users cannot switch to J
3 cheers for Scott!
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Scott
> M Stark
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Is JDK 1.4 required to build
>
>
> Originally I said I thought we nee
Originally I said I thought we needed to keep 4.0 buildable by JDK 1.3,
but I'm starting to think otherwise. I'm about to give in to this demand.
If users cannot switch to JDK 1.4 then I'm willing to say they cannot
make use of the full set of features in 4.0. The remaining question I had
was can t
+2, but already out ranked in earlier thread on same topic
-Tom
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Jason
> Dillon
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:30 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Is JDK 1.4 required to build
>
On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 04:08 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
What is left over is:
org.jboss.cmp (I am guessing this is some of the new cmp framework)
This is our new generic persistence code. Jason can you add a new
empty module 'persistence' for us and we'll move the stuff over.
org.jbos
What about the entire UCL itself? In AOP I have a Javassist type object
that is paired with each UCL that I need to cycle when the UCL is done.
Right now I have explicit calls in the ULR code to trigger this.
Bill
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well it is still possible to separate the two w/o unified interceptors.
Not including the bits from org.jboss.cmp (this stuff is very
independent) there are about 150+ classes which are not directly
dependent on the bits from org.jboss.ejb (and related).
Some bits are forced to remain in jboss
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1067
Successful tests: 1062
Errors:1
Failures: 4
[time of test: 2003-03-06.12-04 GMT]
[java.version: 1.3.1]
Bugs item #698962, was opened at 2003-03-06 12:23
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=698962&group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Stefan Reich (sreich)
Assigned to: Nobody/Ano
I am chill... are you?
--jason
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 02:26 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
then don't do it and chillThis split is not very important. I am
working on it Monday. I'm doing benchmarks the next 2 days.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
then don't do it and chillThis split is not very important. I am
working on it Monday. I'm doing benchmarks the next 2 days.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jason
> Dillon
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTE
Any idea when this will become reality for HEAD? The spaghetti
interceptor model is making the separation of EJB bits from the server
module very hairy if not impossible.
--jason
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of Total
+1 to required JDK 1.4 for HEAD
--jason
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 12:59 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Is JDK 1.4 now required to build? If not when are we going to add
this requirement?
I need an IdentityHashMap for the ObjectCopier and would like to
encapsulate and delegate to IdentityHashM
Is JDK 1.4 now required to build? If not when are we going to add this
requirement?
I need an IdentityHashMap for the ObjectCopier and would like to
encapsulate and delegate to IdentityHashMap for JDK 1.4 (because of
speed) and for JDK 1.3 I will just is an IdentityKey wrapper. This
code wil
Bugs item #698682, was opened at 2003-03-06 09:47
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=698682&group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Mauricio Hiroshi Nagaoka (mhnagaoka)
Bugs item #679705, was opened at 2003-02-03 20:40
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=679705&group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole
>Status: Pending
>Resolution: Wont Fix
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Stefan Kuehnel (skuehnel
Bugs item #692817, was opened at 2003-02-25 11:57
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=692817&group_id=22866
>Category: JBossCMP
>Group: v3.2
Status: Open
>Resolution: Accepted
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Simone (milasx)
>Assigned to: Alexey Loub
Bugs item #688613, was opened at 2003-02-18 13:50
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=688613&group_id=22866
Category: JBossMX
Group: None
>Status: Deleted
>Resolution: Duplicate
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Shyam Sundar (shyamvs)
Assigned to: Nob
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1138
Successful tests: 1131
Errors:7
Failures: 0
[time of test: 2003-03-06.07-55 GMT]
[java.version: 1.4.1_
A loader repository sends a "jboss.mx.class.removed" event type with a
message value equal to the class name for each class being removed
when a class loader is removed from the repository.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
---
26 matches
Mail list logo
