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.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
>
>
>
|