On 11 February 2011 08:56, Dan Creswell <[email protected]> wrote:
> XA-compliant - red rag to a bull that is.....can't keep my mouth shut.... > I'm not saying we SHOULD, but I know that mahalo and TransactionManager changes were being talked about publicly towards the end of Sun's tenure as Jini's custodian. > > XA and two-phase commit tend to go hand in hand and whilst that's certainly > the current Jini spec it has some dark corners progress wise we might want > to look at. This might entail some changes to the spec or at least some > additional guidance..... > Again, the may well be many reasons not to XA mahalo, but a quick perusal by those in the know of said dark corners, wouldn;t go amiss, even if it is to say - 'Nope we're not doing it' > > On the more general "review all services point" - yes, indeed. I'd go as > far > as asking the question "do we still need 'em all?". Less code, makes less > maintenance, makes for more focus on other stuff. > > Or even if we don't need them all, leave them in as an 'extras' package, that could be downloaded if required by the developer, outside of the main build --Calum > On 11 February 2011 08:44, Calum Shaw-Mackay <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > As I recall, while the code was still at Sun, there were thoughts about > > making Mahalo XA-compliant. > > > > And as more general comment, taking into account both comments on > > Outrigger, and the TransactionManager, perhaps there should be an effort > to > > look at all the default services supplied with River, with a view to > seeing > > what the shortcomings are and addressing them in River, rather than > showing > > them as 'just an example of a Transaction Service, etc.', because in the > > main, most users won't reimplement the standard services. > > > > --Calum > > > > On 10 Feb 2011, at 16:49, Gregg Wonderly wrote: > > > > > > > > I'd personally have a great desire to have TransactionManager be a > focus > > of some effort to try and finish getting its behavior to be dependable > and > > consistent for a single process service. > > > > >
