axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glen Daniels <gdani...@macromedia.com>
Subject RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
Date Mon, 06 Jan 2003 20:39:09 GMT

Well, I agree with you.  I don't think you should need to build from source to use third-party
stuff.  But nor do I think we should have any in axis.jar.

I haven't really looked at the JMS transport stuff yet, but I'm assuming that there's just
a setting (engine property / system property /etc) which determines the actual vendor-JMS-interface
class to use.  So you should just be able to pull down a separate sonic-axis-transport.jar
(or something), drop that in your classpath, and set the property in your server-config.wsddd/client-config.wsdd.

Jaime / Dave, is that about how it works?  If so, we just need an axis/dist/third-party directory
so people can pick up the custom jars for stuff like this.

--Glen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin.Bedell@sunlife.com [mailto:Kevin.Bedell@sunlife.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:31 PM
> To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
> Cc: 'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So out of the box Axis can't be used with any specific JMS 
> implementations?
> This seems like it would impede adoption.
> 
> If I have to build from source, does that mean using a 
> nightly build? For
> many of us working in the stodgy, old financial services industry that
> means we won't be able to use it - using nightly build stuff 
> in production
> is frowned on.
> 
> As a user, I'd prefer that I could download and use something 
> out of the
> box - assuming I have the third party jars I need already.
> 
> For example, I've got weblogic here and am using Weblogic JMS 
> for other
> apps. If there were a JMS adapter for weblogic, I'd prefer to 
> use it out of
> the box and just make sure the weblogic JMS classes were on 
> the classpath.
> Ideally, there would be 'stable builds' that would contain 
> the classes I
> needed already compiled.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> 
> 
>                                                               
>                                                               
>            
>                                                               
>                                                               
>            
>              Glen Daniels                      To: 
> "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>         
>                       
>              <gdaniels@macromedia.com>         cc: (bcc: 
> Kevin Bedell/Systems/USHO/SunLife)                            
>                 
>              01/06/2003 03:25 PM               Subject:  RE: 
> JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution                  
>             
>              Please respond to axis-dev                       
>                                                               
>            
>                                                               
>                                                               
>            
>                                                               
>                                                               
>            
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  Generic JMS stuff is OK to have in the JAR, but any
> vendor-specific stuff like Sonic/IBM/etc is not, at least as 
> far as I'm
> concerned.  Other opinions?
> 
> --Glen
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jaime Meritt [mailto:jmeritt@sonicsoftware.com]
> > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:24 PM
> > To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
> >
> >
> > Glen,
> >
> > Great, thanks a lot for the help.  To get the 
> SonicMQVendorAdapter to
> > build you will need the SonicMQ client jars available as
> > well.  What is
> > the current policy on third party library dependencies?  Does
> > the binary
> > distribution include all options or just the default 
> packages?  If it
> > includes all options, I can send you Sonic client libraries 
> for build
> > purposes.  If not, I am assuming the solution is to have users build
> > from the source distribution.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jaime
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@macromedia.com]
> > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 2:14 PM
> > To: 'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'
> > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
> >
> >
> > Actually, I did (JRun's), and have no idea why it wasn't in there.
> >
> > I'll rebuild and repost, though, as beta2.  We should get 1.1 up to
> > speed and out soon!
> >
> > --Glen
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tom Jordahl [mailto:tomj@macromedia.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 2:11 PM
> > > To: 'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'
> > > Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
> > >
> > >
> > > Jaime,
> > >
> > > The release builds are built by the release manager (in
> > > 1.1beta1, that was Glen) and this person has to have all of
> > > the jar files around to get the right build thing to happen.
> > >
> > > My guess is that Glen did NOT have a JMS jar on his system
> > > when building 1.1.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tom Jordahl
> > > Macromedia Server Development
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jaime Meritt [mailto:jmeritt@sonicsoftware.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 1:24 PM
> > > To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > Subject: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I just got an email from a user alerting me to the fact 
> that the JMS
> > > transport classes are not included in the binary
> > distribution for the
> > > Axis 1.1 beta.  It is however available in the source
> > > distribution.  Can
> > > anyone shed some light on this?  I would imagine that the
> > JMS classes
> > > were unavailable when the distribution was built.  Who can
> > modify the
> > > build classpath?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jaime
> > > ---
> > > Jaime Meritt
> > > Manager, Software Engineering
> > > Sonic Software Corporation
> > > 400 Technology Square
> > > Progress Software Suite
> > > Cambridge, MA 02139
> > > Phone: 617-551-6613
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is 
> intended for the use
> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> information that is privileged, proprietary , confidential 
> and exempt from
> disclosure.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
> notified that
> any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication 
> in error,
> please notify the sender and erase this e-mail message immediately.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message