Isn't that non-standard? I mean, Geronimo should be prefering the libs in the WAR over its own libs. I thought that was part of the spec for webapps.
I've been having the same trouble myself, and its contrary to what I expect having used a veriety of other app servers. Geronimo should not be causing my application to blow up because of library conflicts. I do think its ability to share libs easily is good, but I think the default should be to isolate the webapp and allow sharing to be turned on via the geronimo config xml file. Does anyone know why Geronimo is so loose with its classloaders? Was this a design choice or an artifact of some other issue? If it was a design choice, I would *really* like to see the justification for it... and if an artifact, it needs to be corrected ASAP. - Brill Pappin On 3/17/06, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > My first guess is that a copy of spring included in geronimo is > getting used in your web app instead of the copy you are trying to > use: when our copy tries to load the faces/hibernate classes it can't > find them. If this is the problem you should be able to fix it by > adding spring and hibernate to the hidden classes list in your > geronimo plan for your application. [...]
