Including WS-Security stuff?
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 03:53, Ruwan Linton wrote:
> Thanks for the analysis Andreas, I think we can safely get rid of the slf4j
> ... I was running without that local with no issues.
>
> Thanks,
> Ruwan
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Andreas Veithen
> wrote:
>
Thanks for the analysis Andreas, I think we can safely get rid of the slf4j
... I was running without that local with no issues.
Thanks,
Ruwan
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Andreas Veithen
wrote:
> mvn dependency:tree reveals that SLF4J is a dependency of Rampart and
> the VFS transport. In t
mvn dependency:tree reveals that SLF4J is a dependency of Rampart and
the VFS transport. In the case of Rampart this is probably related to
the introduction of OpenSAML2. In the case of the VFS transport, this
dependency is somehow related to MINA and this is probably a left over
from the split of
Thanks Eirc, it seems like this dependency causes some issues for the
JDK-1.5 build. If that is qpid and mina both are not direct dependencies of
synapse, I would remove the slf4j and let any one who wants the above two
scenarios working add it with there own.
Thanks,
Ruwan
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 a
Hi Ruwan,
I think we already had this topic in April. ;-) At that time we identified qpid
and mina, if I'm not wrong. Mina was only used by Quickfix/J...
But here a mail I pulled of my mail archive:
- Mail from Ruwan Sa 04.04.2009 14:26 ---
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:44 P
