Ok, thanks, I'll take your recommendation and keep both. :) I just removed the webservices-common and webservices-builder.
We still need geronimo-webservices module since it is used by geronimo-tomcat whenever user requests to retrieve to see the wsdl via http and the work is delegated to the geronimo-webservices. So in additional to the base web profile, I think we added the following support: javamail connector javaee management/deployment jaspic (currently in) jacc Did the above sound right to people? Lin On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Rick McGuire <rick...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 8/20/2010 4:36 PM, Lin Sun wrote: >> >> It seems hard to remove javamail given openejb depends on it. At >> least for the javamail schema for JNDI, which is used by the >> openejb-client. >> >> Also, I don't quite understand this comment in G roomt pom.xml - >> >> <!-- Use >> org.apache.geronimo.javamail/geronimo-javamail_1.4_mail >> uber jar containing both the spec and the providers in order >> that >> users can actually use mail without advanced degrees in >> geronimo >> classloading. DO NOT add or replace this with >> org.apache.geronimo.specs/geronimo-javamail_1.4_spec --> >> <dependency> >> <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.javamail</groupId> >> <artifactId>geronimo-javamail_1.4_mail</artifactId> >> <version>1.8.1</version> >> </dependency> >> >> This seems to indicate that it is recommended to have java mail spec >> and impl together as dependency, instead of just using the spec jar. > > The uber jar is required in order for the Geronimo mail component to work > correctly, since it configures the various transport implementations. If > that is removed, it might be possible to revert to just the spec jar, but I > think I'd recommend against it because it makes it more difficult to > incrementally add the full javamail support back in. > > Rick > >> Lin >> >>> 1. whether we keep jaspi and javamail in web profile assembly? I >>> personally would say no, but open to opinions. > >
