Mailing-List: contact user-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of paulmcmahan@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.92.169 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=e3M36//HvK9+GUbzpd41uELD9vLrUmYGC9D7WlitCebONomejQA6BYSKCZxoAc6aZFrxJ3yL+1arFLntcFHUHQxGIRkFK/j2wLjfzAlu4UOyGJvsaN/dOdC1X6QjJGExD5obkiYqztwDBfDgqwwZkBJmt4/xtAGXGzCrCni/85E=
Message-ID: <21df75940703150950y2932133btc288ede1079a50e2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:50:35 -0400
From: "Paul McMahan" <paulmcmahan@gmail.com>
To: user@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Is Version 1.1.1(Released September 18,
 2006) the stable version for development?
In-Reply-To: <C40B585EBE11B54CBF47550F01D5AC8901DB8A56@exchange.dbh.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1b5bfeb50703150329v360229bbt297736ca7f76492b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <C40B585EBE11B54CBF47550F01D5AC8901DB8A56@exchange.dbh.de>

I think this problem is fixed in trunk.  See
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2916

Best wishes,
Paul

On 3/15/07, Ueberbach, Michael <michael.ueberbach@dbh.de> wrote:
> I had a little, but nevertheless important problem using 2.0M3 instead of=
 1.1.1.
> When I tried to migrate to 2.0M3 I couldn't manage to deploy a database p=
ool using the console. This was no problem in 1.1.1.
> Maybe this will be solved in the next milestone?
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: eljotpl@gmail.com [mailto:eljotpl@gmail.com] Im Auftrag von Jacek La=
skowski
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. M=E4rz 2007 11:30
> An: user@geronimo.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Is Version 1.1.1(Released September 18, 2006) the stable ver=
sion for development?
>
> On 3/15/07, Joseph Kulandai <kulandai@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is Version 1.1.1(Released September 18, 2006) the stable version for
> > development?
> >
> > I am planning to use Geronimo for development and I would like to know
> > which version is the latest stable version now? Please help me on this.
>
> I'm biased so take it with a grain of salt.
>
> I'd say go for Apache Geronimo v2
> (http://geronimo.apache.org/2007/03/08/apache-geronimo-20-m3-released.htm=
l)
> that comes with the latest Java EE 5 bits. To me, 1.1.1 is as stable as 2=
.0M3 and don't be misled 1.1.1 is better (in terms of stability) than 2.0M3=
 only because of the release number.
>
> There's also the Geronimo Eclipse plugin to help you get started with Jav=
a EE 5 and Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/development-tools.html). Do=
wnload the unofficially official daily driver from. It's listed in the Dail=
y Drivers of the Downloads section. It works with Eclipse IDE 3.3m5eh + WTP=
 2.0m5.
>
> When in doubt, ask your questions here. There's no better way to learn ne=
w stuff than asking about it in public ;-) Also, you may've noticed there's=
 a shortage of 2.0 documentation so your questions and answers are likely t=
o become part of it, too.
>
> Take a look at the website to find out more about Apache Geronimo and rep=
ort any issues you run into on the user mailing list.
>
> Happy Java EE 5 coding with Apache Geronimo!
>
> Jacek
>
> --
>
> Jacek Laskowski
> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
>