Wondering what others think about this issue (may
be minor to most of you!)
I use 3.0.0. If I want to run 3.0.1 or 3.0.2, I
can't do it just by plopping in my wars/config. This is because some of the
settingshave changed (jetty packaged differently, jetty config for setting
dirallowed is different).
Also, a 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 client can't talk to 3.0.0
servers as far as rmi under ejb goes, in my case anyway. I suspect an internal
class shot over rmi changed, because my objects haven't and should have the same
signature.
I have no problem with either of these, jboss just
keeps getting better. But I would like it if only compatible bug fixes and
compatable packaging changes got into .0.0.n revs. In other words make sure an
a.b.c can communicate with an a.b.x.
This may be nitpicking, especially when getting
something so good for free! But it's more than the rev numbers. It is nice to
have a software life cycle where useful fixes get rolled into compatable revs,
and incompatable changes/features get put off (3.2). I really neede the
circularity fix, but really can't use .1 or .2 because of needing the server to
stay put right now.... waddya think?
Rick
|
Title: RE: [JBoss-user] JMX question
- [JBoss-user] JMX question Michael Klem
- Re: [JBoss-user] JMX question Alex Loubyansky
- Re: [JBoss-user] JMX question Michael Klem
- Re[2]: [JBoss-user] JMX question Alex Loubyansky
- RE: [JBoss-user] JMX question JD Brennan
- Re: [JBoss-user] Revision thoughts Rick LaBanca
- Re: [JBoss-user] Revision thoughts Jules Gosnell
- Re: [JBoss-user] Revision thoughts Rick LaBanca
- RE: [JBoss-user] JMX question Michael Klem
- RE: [JBoss-user] JMX question Michael Klem
- Re: [JBoss-user] JMX question David Jencks
- RE: [JBoss-user] JMX question JD Brennan