Oops. Will do that now.
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 6:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-devel] CVS:
> xdoclet/modules/jboss/src/xdoclet/modules/jboss/ejb/resources
> jboss-jaws_xml.xdt,1.8,1.9
>
>
All anonymous CVS access has been disabled by SourceForge, site wide. Only
developers have access. Something to do with stability issues. They have
something on their site about it.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 2
> -Original Message-
> From: Mathias Bogaert [mailto:pathos@;pandora.be]
>
> JDK1.4: +1
+1
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: To learn the basics of securing
your web site with SSL, click here to get a FREE TRIAL of a Thawte
Serve
Don't know if this has been discussed or not, but what do we think about
having ConfigTasks that could be used to provide further configuration
information that might not belong inside a particular SubTask?
For instance:
Otherwise, is gonna keep growing as developers want to add mo
> D'accord?
Yes.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
Xdoclet-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/li
Generating VOs inside EntityBeans they represent is faster, at least in the
JBoss case. When executing code within the EntityBean, JBoss doesn't
require the thread to go through the interceptor stack on every get*()
method.
If the VO is generated in a SessionBean, every call to get*() will be
req
Samples won't compile in head.
It seems that CustomerBean inherits from PersonBean. PersonBean defines all
of the finders. SecurityOfficerBean tries to 'findAll' Customers, but there
are no finders in CustomerHome because CustomerHome no longer inherits from
PersonHome.
If the inheritance issue
Shouldn't ValueObject.hashCode() use PrimaryKey.hashCode()?
I vote to remove all that 37 * result * .hashCode() stuff.
Michael
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Subject: [Xdoclet-devel] Time for a release?
>
> Are they okay to release?
Release! Let's light this candle!
Michael
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:Thin
XDocleteers,
There is a push to get the JBoss XDoclet tags under JBoss-CVS. This would
represent a shift in ownership/responsibility/location of all the
JBoss-specific tags/tasks/templates to the JBoss project.
It may sound a little distressing at first, but in reality, it is a major
win for XD
> From: Aslak Hellesøy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> There are 52 open bugs, 18 open patches and 35 open Feature Requests.
I realize this, that's what prompted my previous question about becoming a
committer.
> Each one of them take time to fix. Your patches are of course much
> appreciated,
Could a committer please give patches 579790 and 580634 a review?
Thanks,
Michael
PS: I am currently just submitting patches when I find a problem. Would it
be better for me to file a bug report, then file a patch for that bug?
---
This sf.n
the
EJBDoclet task and the JBoss subtask.
Thanks,
Michael
SourceForge Id: mnewcomb
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Gadgets, caffeine, t-shirts, fun stuff.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
Could a committer please review and apply the following patches: 579252,
579236, 579172.
Thanks,
Michael
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Two, two, TWO treats in one.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
14 matches
Mail list logo
