Hi everyone,
I still can't quite believe it but in around 10 working hours I managed
to get James 2.3 up and running - not from Phoenix, but booting using
Spring 2.0. :-)
With thorough tests still pending, it is remarkable that James code and
the configuration remains unchanged. It is just p
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Hi everyone,
I still can't quite believe it but in around 10 working hours I managed
to get James 2.3 up and running - not from Phoenix, but booting using
Spring 2.0. :-)
Cool!
Well, I expected it wasn't hard to move away from Phenix. The hard part
would be remove th
On 10/27/06, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I still can't quite believe it but in around 10 working hours I managed
> to get James 2.3 up and running - not from Phoenix, but booting using
> Spring 2.0. :-)
Cool!
Well, I expected it wasn't ha
Well, as I'm not helping, I should probably wait for the classes to
appear in sandbox, but I'm curious ;-)
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Can you elaborate on the "very lean and mean gluecode" ?
1 Main class, 5 classes for injecting Logger and calling
contextualize(), service(), configure(), initial
On 10/27/06, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This opens some amazing possibilities:
Great stuff. I've wanted to see this happen for a long time! Well done.
d.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For addit
Hi Bernd!
Am Freitag, den 27.10.2006, 13:09 +0200 schrieb Bernd Fondermann:
> I still can't quite believe it but in around 10 working hours I managed
> to get James 2.3 up and running - not from Phoenix, but booting using
> Spring 2.0. :-)
Amazing! Great! :-)
> I expect minor problems to ari
On 10/27/06, Joachim Draeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + Deploy with custom code/other beans in a much more easy manner
I guess more people know how to work with spring than with phoenix.
And Spring is much less intrusive. Almost every code can be integrated
without change (even James :-) )
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
BTW: if everything runs well with Spring, which advantages brings us
staying with phoenix, apart from backward compatibility with custom
code?
+ everyone in the dev team knows Avalon/Phoenix
+ it is proven to run James components in a stable production-ready
manner (we d
Am Freitag, den 27.10.2006, 20:45 +0200 schrieb Bernd Fondermann:
> > BTW: if everything runs well with Spring, which advantages brings us
> > staying with phoenix, apart from backward compatibility with custom
> > code?
>
> + everyone in the dev team knows Avalon/Phoenix
> + it is proven to run
Joachim raeger wrote:
Am Freitag, den 27.10.2006, 20:45 +0200 schrieb Bernd Fondermann:
BTW: if everything runs well with Spring, which advantages brings us
staying with phoenix, apart from backward compatibility with custom
code?
+ everyone in the dev team knows Avalon/Phoenix
+ it is proven
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
> Joachim raeger wrote:
>> Am Freitag, den 27.10.2006, 20:45 +0200 schrieb Bernd Fondermann:
>>
BTW: if everything runs well with Spring, which advantages brings us
staying with phoenix, apart from backward compatibility with custom
code?
>>> + everyone in th
On 10/27/06, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I still can't quite believe it but in around 10 working hours I managed
to get James 2.3 up and running - not from Phoenix, but booting using
Spring 2.0. :-)
This is awesome and a huge improvement IMO. Great job! I would be
excited to s
12 matches
Mail list logo
