Re: Close to RC2?

Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:00:38 -0800

Actually, my original thought was to get rid of DBCP because it's a problem child dependency and not everyone needs it. We could leave the <data-sources> element because it's useful to those who need it but they would have to provide the implementation class (change the "type" attribute to required).

But we could just leave everything how it is and only use released versions of DBCP after they get the next release of it out.

Dave


On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, David Graham wrote:

> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:38:01 -0700
> From: David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Close to RC2?
>
> >The commons-pool dependency is indeed inherited from commons-dbcp. We
> >can't actually remove GenericDataSource (in 1.1), because it wasn't
> >deprecated in 1.0 -- we'll be able to clean that up next time around if we
> >want (but we should warn people in the struts-config DTD that the whole
> ><data-sources> element will go away, if that's really what we want to do).
> >
>
> Why would the data-sources element have to go away just because
> GenericDataSource is removed?
>

What would we use instead to implement the data sources?  The
original question (as I understood it) was how to get rid of commons-pool,
which would also require getting rid of commons-dbcp and therefore
eliminating the org.apache.commons.dbcp.BasicDataSource implementation
class.

> >Craig
>
> David
>

Craig

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to