Well, I hope you can fix this Jason because I couldn't, and I'm about 98%
sure the problems lie in the buildmagic extensions being incompatible with
current versions of ant.
We have a long term goal of moving the jboss related xdoclet support to
jboss cvs.
I attempted to start this and to make
I would like to eliminate the buildmagic tasks too. Right now I am
looking into using Maven to replace it all. If I get something running
with Maven I will try to add an XDoclet module as a depend to allow
other projects to use the built tasks... not sure how well that will
work just yet
Just curious if the class-loading experts have looked at ClassWorlds:
http://classworlds.werken.com/
I wonder if we could make use of this as part of the UCL loading
system... ?
--jason
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
On 2003.03.02 08:44 Jason Dillon wrote:
I would like to eliminate the buildmagic tasks too. Right now I am
looking into using Maven to replace it all. If I get something running
with Maven I will try to add an XDoclet module as a depend to allow
other projects to use the built tasks...
The primary overall goal is to move the xdoclet jboss module into jboss
cvs. A secondary goal is to be able to build a jboss specific
version of
xdoclet core, since changes to the jboss-specific stuff have often
required
bugfixes or implementation of missing functionality to xdoclet core.
I
Would it be appropriate to put the new cmp framework in its own module
since it is not particularly dependent on ejbs?
Are we going to move the ejb support into the currently empty ejb module?
david jencks
---
This sf.net email is sponsored
I hope so to both...
--jason
On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 01:09 AM, David Jencks wrote:
Would it be appropriate to put the new cmp framework in its own module
since it is not particularly dependent on ejbs?
Are we going to move the ejb support into the currently empty ejb
module?
david
No, never heard of it. I'll give it a look.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 6:35 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev]
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.4.1_01
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
(resending, first attempt seems to have disappeared)
I've committed a proposal for a jboss-wide interceptor framework in the
common module under org.jboss.interception. This is based on Bill's aop
interceptor framework. It compiles but is untested. Several more or less
needed features are not
I think so.
Is 'cmp' OK for the new module name, or is that too strongly associated
with EJBs? Maybe 'persistence'?
Jeremy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Jencks
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 10:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think it might be better to use a different name non-ejb related...
but whatever... what about just persistence?
--jason
On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 01:45 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
I think so.
Is 'cmp' OK for the new module name, or is that too strongly associated
with EJBs? Maybe
I've committed a proposal for a jboss-wide interceptor framework in the
common module under org.jboss.interception. This is based on Bill's aop
interceptor framework. It compiles but is untested. Several more or less
needed features are not yet implemented, such as a convenient way to
supply a
The jdbc2.PersistenceManager is pissing off the JCA layer in 3.2. Any interaction
with an MDB is resulting in the following warning:
2003-03-02 11:19:36,590 WARN [org.jboss.resource.adapter.jdbc.WrappedConnection]
Closing a statement you left open, please do
your own housekeeping
I added a
=
==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, Standard
Woa, before we have a full fledged interceptor war show up in main what is the
status of the various JMX, AOP, etc interceptors and associated frameworks?
It seems like several people are running around writing this without demonstrating
how it applies to the existing services. A simple example is
No No!! War War War!!!
:-))
Actually I just wanted to get the discussion started early on and try to
get people involved since I think it will be a big undertaking to convert
all the interceptor models to a single one. I don't want to spring an
entire system conversion on anyone without a lot
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss.kimptoc.net FOR DETAILS=
=
JAVA VERSION DETAILS
java version 1.4.1_01
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard
Step 1 would be just the jndi server mbean and remoting which is why this
is as simply as it gets. Beyond that is how to integrate other services via the
aop stuff. I want to see how the existing services are going to use these
new frameworks.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology
Hello all,
I am a post-graduate student in Malaysia. I downloaded
jboss-all.tgz, and compiled the source, got the
following errors. What are the pre-requiste
requirements for compiling and installing jboss?
Currently, my machine is running Red Hat Linux 7.2,
pre-installed with jsdk 1.4 Version
Sunday, March 02, 2003, 9:15:33 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
JD I think it might be better to use a different name non-ejb related...
JD but whatever... what about just persistence?
I like just persistence too.
alex
JD --jason
JD On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 01:45 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
I
I was just thinking about this the other day...
I like just persistence and I would love to have the EJB related stuff
moved to an EJB module. I'd also like to get rid of the
org.jboss.ejb.plugins as it is just a junk drawer.
-dain
On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 12:07 AM, Alex Loubyansky
Bugs item #696381, was opened at 2003-03-02 22:59
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=696381group_id=22866
Category: JBossWeb
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Jules Gosnell
Bugs item #696381, was opened at 2003-03-02 22:59
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=696381group_id=22866
Category: JBossWeb
Group: v3.2
Status: Pending
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Jules
You have an obsolete snapshot. Get the current release snapshot from
the sourceforge files page.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: Chan Hae Loong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Change Notes item #696391, was opened at 2003-03-03 01:37
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=381174aid=696391group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Julien Viet (cooperfbi)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous
26 matches
Mail list logo
