I would have to look at it again but Ole pretty much convinced me that the TX stuff is correct, it is in fact a property of the spec that we end up with this kludgy design and spaghetti code mess.
One day when I really can lay back and work on something new, spec wise, I will write a new transactional spec, the current ones are pompous stupid caca, in my opinion. We could easily put the serialization in the transaction but then it would break some other TM, for now it is work I really don't want to do right now, it is ugly, undoing previous work and would require thinking something I don't want to do right now. Bottom line: I am working on the website and I want to finish. marcf |-----Original Message----- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jason |Dillon |Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:33 PM |To: Scott M Stark; [EMAIL PROTECTED] |Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Fwd: transaction module & ClientUserTransaction | | |Any plans on moving this forward to extract the JRMP specific bits |from User |TX in the near future? | |--jason | | |On Wednesday 15 May 2002 07:26 am, Scott M Stark wrote: |> The discussion that Marc and Ole had previously suggested that |> the Transaction implementation should be serializable and this is |> where externalization would happen rather than through the |> TransactionPropagationContextFactory abstraction. These |> are what the comments are referring to. |> |> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |> Scott Stark |> Chief Technology Officer |> JBoss Group, LLC |> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |> |> Subject: transaction module & ClientUserTransaction |> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:58:25 -0700 |> From: Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |> |> Who knows about ClientUserTransaction? |> |> This class is dependent on JRMPInvokerProxy when calling |setTPCFatcory on |> construction. JRMPInvokerProxy has comments about moving this. I am |> guessing this should be moved to an interceptor, but I am not sure... |> (since I don't even know what a TPC is). |> |> I need this dependency fixed before I can move the tm stuff to its own |> module. |> |> Can someone who knows more about this please look into this. |> |> Thanks, |> |> --jason |> |> ------------------------------------------------------- |> |> _______________________________________________________________ |> |> Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. |We supply |> the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |> _______________________________________________ |> Jboss-development mailing list |> [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development |> |> |> |> _______________________________________________________________ |> |> Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. |We supply |> the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |> _______________________________________________ |> Jboss-development mailing list |> [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development | |_______________________________________________________________ | |Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply |the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |_______________________________________________ |Jboss-development mailing list |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
