Sacha,
>> Regarding #2, I find the current state of /deploy to be
>> highly intuitive, personally. Would it be possible to make
>> your scheme work by giving .sar's the ability to be nested?
>> That way, /deploy/JMS.sar (a directory) could contain
>> jms-foo.sar and jms-bar.sar.
>That's a
muy bien (my spanish half takes over during the war)
much needed simplifications.
> 2°) IMHO, way to many files exist in /deploy
> This is counterintuitive for jboss-users: it may be fine for
> jboss developers but I don't think it is ok for simple users.
Agreed
> First suggestion: we add a n
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 1:15 AM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL]: clean conf/jboss-service.xml & deploy
> > Rather than a specialized SubDirSubDeployer, how about having the SAR
> > report multiple watch-urls?
>
> Yes, that would be an idea.
>
> Rather than a specialized SubDirSubDeployer, how about having the SAR
> report multiple watch-urls?
Yes, that would be an idea.
> It may also be possible to have the SAR start its own
> URLDeploymentScanner for its content rather than explicitly sub-deploy
> it. This would support automatic red
scanned URL the SAR's root.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Sacha Labourey
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:27 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL]: clean
> co
> The thing I care about most is ease of configurability
> (which, for the most part, I think we already have). I like
> the idea that I can add or remove functionality by adding or
> removing "modules" from /deploy. Much of the functionality
> of the server works this way (jmx-console, for
sted? That way, /deploy/JMS.sar (a directory) could contain
jms-foo.sar and jms-bar.sar.
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: Sacha Labourey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 5:53 AM
To: Jboss-Dev
Subject: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL]: clean conf/jboss-service.x
Hi Sacha!
I think this sounds very good, because it is as you said a bit
confusing with all these files in deploy and conf. To group them
together in JMS/JMX/... subdiroctories i think would be a good solution
and also having them apart from users application deployments - like
deploy/system a
Hello,
Currently, the content of conf/jboss-service.xml and deploy is not very
clean.
1°) Some services defined in conf/jboss-service.xml require services later
deployed in deploy
Exemples:
- the EJBDeployer depends on the JMS Pool
- some invokers (3.2+) require jboss-jca.jar
On 2003.03.09 15:20 Bill Burke wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> David
> > Jencks
> > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 8:23 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David
> Jencks
> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 8:23 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
>
>
> >
> &g
The AOP case is even more similar to the DP if you
think of AOP like this:
If the AOP intrumented methods are: <
Interceptors are: []
The original (but renamed) object methods are: (
The object is: O
An AOP stack then is: <[](O
Which is almost the same as the DP case: |[](O
Regards,
Hiram
> If
>
> > 5. multiple interceptor chains per InvocationFactory, e.g. each method
> > gets a separate interceptor chain. (Idea from current mbean interceptor
> > implementation)
> >
>
> Do we really need per method interceptor chains? We did not need them to
> implement EJBs.
>
After working with
> It makes some interceptors less complex to implement. It
> makes sense at service interception where we may have a
> separation between attributes/operations. Say I want to
> persist 2 out of 3 attributes I'm changing. Operations don't
> need the persistence interceptor, nor do all the attrib
> , #2, and #3a if I can focus solely on this for 5 days with
> no interuptions.
OK I will guarantee the no interuptions. Get it fucking done and you
will put us all on top of the middleware world. JNDI is the simplest
test case as Scott pointed and something I wanted see done in a long
time
m
f Of Bill Burke
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 2:09 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
>
>
> The AOP framework really right now is only for POJO
> interception. I do have the beginnings of DynamicProxies
> though
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Bill Burke wrote:
> >
> > 1. Source located in neutral territory, namely the common module.
ok
> >
> > 2. Sequence of interceptors determined by (iterator in) invocation object.
This could be a modifiable iterator at some point. This allows the
interceptor stack to be modifie
03 3:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
>
>
> And I'm saying I want a prototype that demonstrates how the
> various interceptor
> offerings work in the context of a real service. Part of the
> testsuite
ROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
> >
> >
> > On 2003.03.02 16:16 Nathan Phelps wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree.
> > With what, specifically?
> >
> > As I
MAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 11:16 AM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
> On 2003.03.02 16:16 Nathan Phelps wrote:
> >
> > I agree.
> With w
> -Original Message-
> From: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 2:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide int
anks
david jencks
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nathan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Scott M Stark
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 1:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wi
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Nathan Phelps
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
>
>
>
> I agree. As I begin the development of JMS/JBoss 4.0,
advertised.
Thanks,
Nathan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Scott M Stark
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 1:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
Woa, before we have a full fledged i
Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
tt Stark
> Chief Technology Officer
> JBoss Group, LLC
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 10:28 AM
> Subject: [JBoss-de
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 10:28 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for jboss-wide interceptor framework
> (resending, first attempt seems to have disappeared)
>
> I've committed a proposal for a jboss-wide interceptor fr
I've committed a proposal for a jboss-wide interceptor framework in the
common module under org.jboss.interception. This is based on Bill's aop
interceptor framework. It compiles but is untested. Several more or less
needed features are not yet implemented, such as a convenient way to
supply a
(resending, first attempt seems to have disappeared)
I've committed a proposal for a jboss-wide interceptor framework in the
common module under org.jboss.interception. This is based on Bill's aop
interceptor framework. It compiles but is untested. Several more or less
needed features are not y
OK. Good luck.
Cheers,
sacha
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
> Jeremy Boynes
> Envoyé : mercredi, 11 décembre 2002 16:56
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to UR
emy Boynes
> > Envoyé : mardi, 10 décembre 2002 19:03
> > À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Objet : RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to URL deployment to clean
> > up netboot
> >
> >
> > I have a prototype of the changes to SARDeployer ready to go. However, I
&g
;origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
> Jeremy Boynes
> Envoyé : mardi, 10 décembre 2002 19:03
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to URL deployment to clean
> up netboot
>
>
> I have a prototype of
tisdagen den 10 december 2002 kl 19.03 skrev Jeremy Boynes:
I lean toward A) as there are existing dependencies during boot (e.g.
getopt, gnu-regexp, log4j) but I realise that adding more is
undesirable.
Functionality is desired ... when 'one' dives in a prob on a moving xp
target - the 'one'
will send you a very small doco I wrote about the
> current status.
>
> Cool changes.Cheers,
>
>
> sacha
>
> > -Message d'origine-
> > De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
> > Jeremy Boynes
> > Envoyé : dimanche, 8 décem
MAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
> Jeremy Boynes
> Envoyé : dimanche, 8 décembre 2002 09:00
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to URL deployment to clean
> up netboot
>
>
> Scott Stark wrote:
> > Sounds ok, but l
day, December 07, 2002 11:59 PM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to URL deployment to clean up netboot
> Scott Stark wrote:
> > Sounds ok, but let see some more details. Show how you propose to rewrite
> > SARDeployer.parseXMLClasspath using this helper framework.
adding others is not pluggable.
Jeremy
> ----- Original Message -
> From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Jboss-Development" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 10:36 AM
> Subject: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to URL d
cember 07, 2002 10:36 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] Proposal for changes to URL deployment to clean up netboot
> Wanted to get feedback before starting to implement...
>
> The current support for loading deployment units has several special cases
> to deal with loading from the net
Wanted to get feedback before starting to implement...
;)
The current support for loading deployment units has several special
cases
to deal with loading from the network e.g. in
SARDeployer.parseXMLClasspath(), NetBootHelper.getDefaultListUrl() or
even
HttpURLDeploymentScanner itself.
Spec
Wanted to get feedback before starting to implement...
The current support for loading deployment units has several special cases
to deal with loading from the network e.g. in
SARDeployer.parseXMLClasspath(), NetBootHelper.getDefaultListUrl() or even
HttpURLDeploymentScanner itself.
I would like
Sir,
I crave your indulgence as I contact you in such a surprising manner. I respectfully
insist that you read this letter carefully, as I am optimistic that it will open doors
for unimaginable financial rewards for both of us.
I am very sorry for not introducing myself first. My name is Mr
Sir,
I crave your indulgence as I contact you in such a surprising manner. I respectfully
insist that you read this letter carefully, as I am optimistic that it will open doors
for unimaginable financial rewards for both of us.
I am very sorry for not introducing myself first. My name is Mr
That is true and it seems that SF will not be implementing the
cvs history feature.
> But where on SF do you have a synthetized list of recent CVS commits? The
> site simply says, in the CVS section, "No CVS History Available".
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Sacha
>
>
> > Seperate them as they can be me
Hello Scott,
But where on SF do you have a synthetized list of recent CVS commits? The
site simply says, in the CVS section, "No CVS History Available".
Cheers,
Sacha
> Seperate them as they can be merged by any decent mail client
> if desired. Do we really ne
0:37 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Proposal: separate cvs update from Dev?
>
> Seperate them as they can be merged by any decent mail client
> if desired. Do we really need a cvs forum? This info is available
> through a browser interface from sourceforge in a mu
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 8:36 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] Proposal: separate cvs update from Dev?
> Ok,
>
> now that I live in orbit and purely on the website forums it is true that
the cvs-commits are un-bearable. Also the v
> I think this is a great idea. It is not often that
> you get to please
> everyone. :)
In my case almost never really ]:)
__
View this jboss-dev thread in the online forums:
http://jboss.org/forums/thread.jsp?forum=66&thread=669
, January 05, 2002 10:37 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [JBoss-dev] Proposal: separate cvs update from Dev?
>
>
> Ok,
>
> now that I live in orbit and purely on the website forums it
> is true that the cvs-commits are un-bearable. Also the
> volume of c
Ok,
now that I live in orbit and purely on the website forums it is true that the
cvs-commits are un-bearable. Also the volume of commits is about to go sky high as we
stabilize all the new features of jboss 3.0.
I know I have been against separating the two lists in the past but now I am
Hi,
I would like to add a small (well a big for me) feature to Entity EJB 1.1 in
CMP mode.
Dirk Zimmermann has already make some changes for that and I would like to
extend them.
I also would like your opinion on that.
We could call it "Nested Properties in CMP".
Current State
-
When
You might get this twice - or even 3 times - it seems sourceforge.net/the
mailing list is having trouble delivering my messages...
>
>
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "Day, Jem BGI WAC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > You've probably already seen this but the Th
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:32 AM
|To: marc fleury; Kimpton,C (Chris);
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL] daily builds?
|
|
|Yes.
|
|Sorry about dropping in and out. Hope I can be
|forgiven. When consulting is slow jboss contribution
|is high, when consu
aswell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:15 AM
> To: marc fleury; Kimpton,C (Chris);
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL] daily builds?
>
>
> I would be happy to help out with integrating the
> JUnit test stuff with a build/distr
Yes.
Sorry about dropping in and out. Hope I can be
forgiven. When consulting is slow jboss contribution
is high, when consulting is busy... you get the idea.
I'm still here!!
Summary:
JCTS is well developed with respect to Stateful and
Stateless session beans. BMP is also well developed
and
I'm glad that somebody has finally proposed this. If you need any help,
or don't have the time to do this, we can take it over. I've done this
sort of thing many times.
Regards,
Bill Burke
CommerceTone
Kimpton,C (Chris) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are there daily builds done of jboss?
>
>
> Can I
, 2001 10:15 AM
|To: marc fleury; Kimpton,C (Chris);
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL] daily builds?
|
|
|I would be happy to help out with integrating the
|JUnit test stuff with a build/distribution... Just
|let me know...
|
|cheers,
|peter
|
|
|--- marc fleury <[EMAIL PROTEC
age-
> |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of
> |Kimpton,C (Chris)
> |Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 5:36 AM
> |To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> |Subject: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL] daily builds?
> |
> |
> |Hi,
> |
> |Are there daily
hing
marc
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
|Kimpton,C (Chris)
|Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 5:36 AM
|To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
|Subject: [JBoss-dev] [PROPOSAL] daily builds?
|
|
|Hi,
|
|Are there daily builds done of jboss?
|
|
|Can
Hi,
Are there daily builds done of jboss?
Can I offer to do these (automatically of course).
This would include the following;
clean checkout of the latest code
build the code from scratch (from several modules), send an email to
jboss-dev if compile fails
if builds
59 matches
Mail list logo
