ule.
From build.xml this seems to come after the server module so why is it
compiling fine while resident in the server module?
Maybe I don't really understand what the dependencies and class paths are
during the build?
Any help to understand how the build process works would be welcome.
When I wrote my first
JCA I found that book to be a great help.
brian wallis...
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it
help you create better code? SHARE THE
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 08:21 pm, Juha Lindfors wrote:
> Subclasses would fall under LGPL, as far as I can tell, if they're
> distributed publically.
What about "implements EntityBean" etc. Surely all my beans are not now LGPL.
Or "extends ServiceMBeanSupport" so my mbeans are now LGPL.
I hope not.
s.
Of course, it requires a level of trust and responsibility on the part of the
contributers.
As to web forums. One that allows either web or email participation would help
get more people involved. To split it across two seems very wasteful to
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 08:49, Bill Burke wrote:
> 2. More importantly, we have learned that they have forked JBoss. We also
> believe they are preparing to submit it, or some derivation, to the new
> Apache Geronimo project which would violate copyright and LGPL. Our proof?
>
> http://sourceforge.net
e or more specific files that are GPL rather than LGPL?
If these do exist what is the plan to rectify what to me seems to be a serious
problem. Something like this could prevent me from using JBoss at all. This
is serious if true!
brian wallis...
---
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:07, Bill Burke wrote:
> Please ignore the FUD from SUN. We have and always will strictly abide by
> the standards.
As I expected you would. Thanks and keep up the great work!
brian wallis...
---
This SF.net em
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:16, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> To Brian Wallis, even if Jboss were to get certified, it would not make
> your J2EE compliant applications portable. Why? There are may
> important things considered outside the specification. For example,
> all database mappings
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:42, Tom Elrod wrote:
> IMHO, I don't know that passing the certification tests now would be of
> much benefit to JBoss. The biggest drawback I can see is that with JBoss
> 4, we will be moving people away from having to deal with all the extra API
> non-sense that J2EE devel
