geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <joe.b...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: [jira] Created: (GERONIMO-3348) java.lang.NoSuchMethodError in org.springframework.context.i18n.LocaleContextHolder
Date Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:25:39 GMT
+1 (assuming it doesn't affect TCK) ;-)

Joe


Kevan Miller wrote:
> 
> On Jul 25, 2007, at 2:23 PM, Aleksandr Tarutin (JIRA) wrote:
> 
>> java.lang.NoSuchMethodError in 
>> org.springframework.context.i18n.LocaleContextHolder
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>
>>
>>                  Key: GERONIMO-3348
>>                  URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3348
>>              Project: Geronimo
>>           Issue Type: Bug
>>       Security Level: public (Regular issues)
>>     Affects Versions: 2.0-M6
>>          Environment: 2.6.18-gentoo-r2 #1 Sat Nov 11 03:36:37 EST 2006 
>> i686 Pentium III (Katmai) GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
>> JDK-1.5.0.12
>>
>>             Reporter: Aleksandr Tarutin
> 
> This problem is caused by incompatibilities between the spring jars 
> included within the cxf module and the spring jars included within the 
> application. I think this is going to be a pretty common failure 
> scenario. Rather than require a lot of Spring users to create a geronimo 
> deployment plan, I'd like to add the necessary hidden-classes to the 
> jetty6-deployer defaultEnvironment, namely:
> 
> --- jetty6-deployer/src/plan/plan.xml    (revision 560807)
> +++ jetty6-deployer/src/plan/plan.xml    (working copy)
> @@ -130,7 +130,10 @@
>                          <type>car</type>
>                      </dependency>
>                  </dependencies>
> -                <hidden-classes/>
> +                <hidden-classes>
> +                    <filter>org.springframework.</filter>
> +                    <filter>org.apache.cxf.</filter>
> +                </hidden-classes>
>                  <non-overridable-classes>
>                      <filter>java.</filter>
>                      <filter>javax.</filter>
> 
> I'm running some TCK tests, now. Assuming things look good, I'd like to 
> commit to 2.0. Any objections? We could do nothing and require users to 
> create a geronimo deployment plan which hides these same classes, 
> instead. However, I'd like to make this scenario work out-of-the-box...
> 
> Jarek has mentioned that with a bit of work, our cxf module need not be 
> dependent on Spring configuration. This seems like a good idea. I'd 
> certainly like to see the dependency dropped. However, don't see that 
> happening in time for 2.0.
> 
> --kevan
> 

Mime
View raw message