Aight, no worries... still the same problem. Would have recommended
that 1.2 get released before any significant changes here made.
Still possible to SVK merge 1.2 into trunk, just its going to be much
more manual now.
--jason
On Dec 11, 2006, at 6:37 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Most of what I'
Most of what I'm doing are only deletions since the new modules were
already created when sandbox/javaee5 was merged with trunk. For the
"rework items", I am currently planning to leave the names of the
configurations unchanged. I will change
assemblies/geronimo-jetty-minimal to assemblies/ge
Hrm... I had hoped that refactoring like this would have been delayed
until 1.2 was out the door. As with so many module renames, sync'ing
the 1.2 tree with trunk using SVK is going to be nearly impossible.
Maybe once SVK has more Perforce-like integration tracking then it
can handle rena
Do we need to include the jetty version number in the configs that
support the applications/* artifacts? My take away from the tomcat v6
conversation was that the version number was for the artifacts that
incorporate the third party component plus their configs and
assemblies. But I realize that
Fine with me, thanks for cleaning this up!
thanks
david jencks
On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:42 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
In a short while (probably in about 3 hours or so), I plan to
delete the and rename several Jetty items in Geronimo. This is
because we are no longer supporting the j2ee assembly
In a short while (probably in about 3 hours or so), I plan to delete the
and rename several Jetty items in Geronimo. This is because we are no
longer supporting the j2ee assembly in trunk which IIUC is now devoted
to JavaEE5. There are also a few loose ends for the Jetty JavaEE5
assembly t
