commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Oliver Zeigermann" <>
Subject Re: [transaction 2.0] stripping to its very core
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:15:58 GMT
Sounds like a good idea. Could you set up such a project structure?

The main problem with xa is that we can not suspend/resume with given
the current implementation that relies on ReentrantReadWriteLock.
Reason is that you can not transfer locks from one thread to another.
I will investigate if this can be changed easily.

For the time being I will add a new flavor of tx maps as I am no
longer sure that there really is no use case for them.


2007/7/20, Joerg Heinicke <>:
> Oliver Zeigermann <oliver <at>> writes:
> > I am proposing to strip Commons Transaction to its very core.
> > Deleted:
> > - no more XA classes: We really can not an implement an XA resource
> > with the existing implementation
> Hi Oliver,
> reducing ctx to a core is a good idea. I only would not like to see the XA stuff
> been dropped completely. I think it's quite important for getting ctx "sold". I
> have a second project in maven 2 sense in mind as commons jci does:
> So we would have
> commons-transaction.jar and a commons-transaction-xa.jar.
> Joerg
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message