Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
I took hooked up as part of jboss-all and now realize it may not be what you meant. Just did a fresh check out of jboss-all and got no iiop subdir. Did I misunderstand something? Thanks and cheers, Francisco On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: This is done. --jason On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Francisco Reverbel wrote: On 16 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: I have just committed the last of the structure changes that I am going to introduce until after 3.0 is released. This change includes: ... [snip] o Addition of IIOP module. This is not hooked up by default (yet). Could you please hook it up? As an optional module, like jboss.net. Cheers, Francisco ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
Sorry about that. I thought I added that module to the list, but apparently I did not. Should be fixed now. --jason On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Francisco Reverbel wrote: I took hooked up as part of jboss-all and now realize it may not be what you meant. Just did a fresh check out of jboss-all and got no iiop subdir. Did I misunderstand something? Thanks and cheers, Francisco On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: This is done. --jason On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Francisco Reverbel wrote: On 16 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: I have just committed the last of the structure changes that I am going to introduce until after 3.0 is released. This change includes: ... [snip] o Addition of IIOP module. This is not hooked up by default (yet). Could you please hook it up? As an optional module, like jboss.net. Cheers, Francisco ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
On 16 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: I have just committed the last of the structure changes that I am going to introduce until after 3.0 is released. This change includes: ... [snip] o Addition of IIOP module. This is not hooked up by default (yet). Could you please hook it up? As an optional module, like jboss.net. Cheers, Francisco ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
RE: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
CVS newbie question: How can someone know the optional packages on jboss? I mean, apart of guessing on xml files and sniffing on the SourceForge interface. Would be nice if someone puts something about this (including the _nice_ cvs update -dP command) on the FAQs. Basic cvs is covered, but little more. -Mensaje original- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]En nombre de Francisco Reverbel Enviado el: lunes, 18 de febrero de 2002 23:44 Para: Jason Dillon CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README** On 16 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: I have just committed the last of the structure changes that I am going to introduce until after 3.0 is released. This change includes: ... [snip] o Addition of IIOP module. This is not hooked up by default (yet). Could you please hook it up? As an optional module, like jboss.net. Cheers, Francisco ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
This is done. --jason On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Francisco Reverbel wrote: On 16 Feb 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: I have just committed the last of the structure changes that I am going to introduce until after 3.0 is released. This change includes: ... [snip] o Addition of IIOP module. This is not hooked up by default (yet). Could you please hook it up? As an optional module, like jboss.net. Cheers, Francisco ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes -**README**
All these name changes are basically just screwing around with semantic trivialities. Change these names back: mq - messaging resource - connector plastic - j2ee and do not make any more name changes without discussing why it is necessary. - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:46 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes -**README** On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 23:29, Scott M Stark wrote: o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. Messaging is a better name than mq. I figured the jbossmq folks would want something mq-like back. I personally don't care too much... just had trouble typing messaging. o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. Connector is more clearly associated with the JCA than resource. Leave this as connector. JCA uses javax.resource.* for its packaging. They really should have called it JRCA, since it is for connecting resources. If you don't mind I would like to keep it as resource, as it makes it more logically to house standard adapters there. Basically its just a name, so I don't care too much. I only made these changes because I thought that the current names were poor for what types of bits live in them. o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's What has plastic to do with standard j2ee interfaces? These are getting to be riduculous name changes so knock it off and change plastic back to j2ee. I figured someone was going to say something about this. I had noticed that we are now providing JMX interfaces in a similar style to the j2ee interfaces. Perhaps we will do the same in the future as well. So in comes plastic, which is a module which only serves to hold these implementations. Perhaps I had picked up a little bit of an urge to have some spiffy macosx-like names from looking over the apple website lately. If you feel strongly about reverting I will. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes-**README**
You are right. I had a momentary lapse of reason (that lasted for more than a moment actually). I still think that we should find a better name for the j2ee module, but there is only real motivation to do that if we move the jmx and other apis in there too. My apologies for my lack of sensibility on this matter. I will have it fixed shortly. --jason On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 00:24, Scott M Stark wrote: All these name changes are basically just screwing around with semantic trivialities. Change these names back: mq - messaging resource - connector plastic - j2ee and do not make any more name changes without discussing why it is necessary. - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:46 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes -**README** On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 23:29, Scott M Stark wrote: o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. Messaging is a better name than mq. I figured the jbossmq folks would want something mq-like back. I personally don't care too much... just had trouble typing messaging. o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. Connector is more clearly associated with the JCA than resource. Leave this as connector. JCA uses javax.resource.* for its packaging. They really should have called it JRCA, since it is for connecting resources. If you don't mind I would like to keep it as resource, as it makes it more logically to house standard adapters there. Basically its just a name, so I don't care too much. I only made these changes because I thought that the current names were poor for what types of bits live in them. o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's What has plastic to do with standard j2ee interfaces? These are getting to be riduculous name changes so knock it off and change plastic back to j2ee. I figured someone was going to say something about this. I had noticed that we are now providing JMX interfaces in a similar style to the j2ee interfaces. Perhaps we will do the same in the future as well. So in comes plastic, which is a module which only serves to hold these implementations. Perhaps I had picked up a little bit of an urge to have some spiffy macosx-like names from looking over the apple website lately. If you feel strongly about reverting I will. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes-**README**
This is done. --jason On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 00:39, Jason Dillon wrote: You are right. I had a momentary lapse of reason (that lasted for more than a moment actually). I still think that we should find a better name for the j2ee module, but there is only real motivation to do that if we move the jmx and other apis in there too. My apologies for my lack of sensibility on this matter. I will have it fixed shortly. --jason On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 00:24, Scott M Stark wrote: All these name changes are basically just screwing around with semantic trivialities. Change these names back: mq - messaging resource - connector plastic - j2ee and do not make any more name changes without discussing why it is necessary. - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott M Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:46 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes -**README** On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 23:29, Scott M Stark wrote: o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. Messaging is a better name than mq. I figured the jbossmq folks would want something mq-like back. I personally don't care too much... just had trouble typing messaging. o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. Connector is more clearly associated with the JCA than resource. Leave this as connector. JCA uses javax.resource.* for its packaging. They really should have called it JRCA, since it is for connecting resources. If you don't mind I would like to keep it as resource, as it makes it more logically to house standard adapters there. Basically its just a name, so I don't care too much. I only made these changes because I thought that the current names were poor for what types of bits live in them. o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's What has plastic to do with standard j2ee interfaces? These are getting to be riduculous name changes so knock it off and change plastic back to j2ee. I figured someone was going to say something about this. I had noticed that we are now providing JMX interfaces in a similar style to the j2ee interfaces. Perhaps we will do the same in the future as well. So in comes plastic, which is a module which only serves to hold these implementations. Perhaps I had picked up a little bit of an urge to have some spiffy macosx-like names from looking over the apple website lately. If you feel strongly about reverting I will. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
[JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
I have just committed the last of the structure changes that I am going to introduce until after 3.0 is released. This change includes: o Addition of (currently empty) ejb and system modules. These will be used to split up server into smaller more manageable components based on functionality. o Addition of IIOP module. This is not hooked up by default (yet). o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's * * * I added a build/fix-workspace.xml which should help automate the update process ( as long as you read this email that is =P ). You can always pull a fresh copy from cvs via: cvs get jboss-all or you can: cd jboss-all ./build/build.sh -f fix-workspace.xml This *should* take care of updating and submitting any open changes prior and *should* fail if there is a conflict, but I have not tested that. I would suggest doing an update and commit before running this. As always, let me know if there are any problems. I am hoping that this script will make it easier for folks to handle structure changes, which will be crucial as JBoss gets bigger and better. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes - **README**
o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. Messaging is a better name than mq. o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. Connector is more clearly associated with the JCA than resource. Leave this as connector. o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's What has plastic to do with standard j2ee interfaces? These are getting to be riduculous name changes so knock it off and change plastic back to j2ee. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes -**README**
On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 23:29, Scott M Stark wrote: o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. Messaging is a better name than mq. I figured the jbossmq folks would want something mq-like back. I personally don't care too much... just had trouble typing messaging. o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. Connector is more clearly associated with the JCA than resource. Leave this as connector. JCA uses javax.resource.* for its packaging. They really should have called it JRCA, since it is for connecting resources. If you don't mind I would like to keep it as resource, as it makes it more logically to house standard adapters there. Basically its just a name, so I don't care too much. I only made these changes because I thought that the current names were poor for what types of bits live in them. o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's What has plastic to do with standard j2ee interfaces? These are getting to be riduculous name changes so knock it off and change plastic back to j2ee. I figured someone was going to say something about this. I had noticed that we are now providing JMX interfaces in a similar style to the j2ee interfaces. Perhaps we will do the same in the future as well. So in comes plastic, which is a module which only serves to hold these implementations. Perhaps I had picked up a little bit of an urge to have some spiffy macosx-like names from looking over the apple website lately. If you feel strongly about reverting I will. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure Changes -**README**
o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking before when I used messaging. Sorry. Messaging is a better name than mq. I figured the jbossmq folks would want something mq-like back. I personally don't care too much... just had trouble typing messaging. I just re-read this and it sounds like I was just aimlessly changing names, which I was not... though now that I think about it my reasons for changing were not really solid enough to make the change. Basically, messaging led me to think that all jms related bits should go there... but that really isn't possible or desirable. This leaded me to change the name back to mq, as in jbossmq... but I hope to eventually re-org the cvs repository (later) under jboss/* (so that cvs update will work as expected) and I was hoping to avoid jboss/jboss* names. So, I just wanted to comment that I did have a reason, which did make some sense, or else I would have not put in the effort. Though I do realize now that it does not really matter either way. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
