geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: [vote]POJO design?
Date Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:00:19 GMT
	I'm not able to fully apply Greg's latest patch:

patch: **** malformed patch at line 4838: RCS file: 
modules/core/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/deployment/model/web/AbstractWebApp.java

	It doesn't apply anything after that, and that's only 60% of the 
file.  Nevertheless, it appears that all the EJB content applied, so I'll 
base my comments on that:

[-1] Greg's patch: A single tree of standard & geronimo elements
[+1] Aaron's/Jeremy's patch: Dual concrete trees
[??] Proposal of a concrete geronimo tree with abstract standard tree.

	I'll take these in reverse order:

I don't have a clear understanding of the third option.

I am obviously in favor of my own suggestion

I cannot agree to Greg's patch "as is" for the following reasons:

 - Classes in the non-Geronimo J2EE package depend on classes in the
Geronimo package, which does not make sense to me

 - There is not actually a way to use only the standard J2EE DD tree; you 
cannot figure out whether any given field is a Geronimo field or a 
standard field

 - The set of interfaces provided (JNDIEnvironmentRefs, JNDINameable, and
JNDIRef) could be used as is for the other proposal, so there is no
advantage granted by just using interfaces.  Would interface supporters
cheerfully agree to the other patch if I add the same 3 interfaces to it?

Aaron


Mime
View raw message