axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Jordahl <t...@macromedia.com>
Subject RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
Date Mon, 06 Jan 2003 20:39:14 GMT

Each release has a source as well as a binary distribution.
So you would build from the "1.1 final" source tree.

--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development



-----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