struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Arron Bates" <>
Date Fri, 09 May 2003 00:27:18 GMT
> Just to be clear, we're not planning on keeping GDS after 1.1 is released 
> right?  This is just a temporary solution to maintain compatibility?
> David

How about the wrapper/factory proposal I posted?... it would even decouple
anything in the future and allow other developers to get their own pool
implementations in there. Doesn't anyone else think it'd solve the issue?...


> >So, by retrofitting the old GDS and adding the new 1.4 Connection 
> >signatures as "UnsupportedOperation", she compiles under 1.4 but *without* 
> >Commons-DBCP and Commons-Pool.
> >
> >I have a Struts 1.0 intranet application that uses the old GDS, so I'll try 
> >migrating that to Struts 1.1 tonight, and run some tests. But, since the 
> >whole idea of the old GDS wrapper was backward compatibility, it should be 
> >fine.
> >
> >Since we're replacing the classes outright, a diff didn't make sense, so I 
> >attach a ZIP of the updated GDS and GC classes, in case anyone is 
> >interested. These would just be dumped into the util package.
> >
> >I'll report again and call for a vote before committing anything to CVS.
> >
> >-Ted.
> >
> >Ted Husted wrote:
> >>So one thing that switching over to DBCP did for us was to gain support 
> >>(or at least compilability) for the new additions to the Connection 
> >>interface in Java 1.4. These are the SavePoint and Holdability methods, as 
> >>well as the additional PreparedStatement signatures.
> >>
> >>The quick fix would be to have all of these throw an 
> >>UnsupportedOperationException, as we did for other things GDS didn't 
> >>support. That's what I'm trying now. If anyone were already using this in 
> >>Struts 1.0, they wouldn't be using these features anyway.
> >>
> >>If we're not going to carry the DBCP forward into future releases, then 
> >>rolling back to GDS seems to me like the best solution, since it retains 
> >>backward compatibility and leaves us the least to do later.
> >>
> >>If I do get this to work, I will of course post a diff for feedback before 
> >>committing anything back.
> >>
> >>Ted Husted wrote:
> >>
> >>>I'll try it now and see how it goes.
> >>>
> >>>David Graham wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>The easiest solution would be to include the last final release of DBCP.

> >>>>  If everyone agrees on rolling back to GDS and someone volunteers to

> >>>>perform the changes, then it's fine with me.  We haven't heard from many

> >>>>of the committers on this topic though.
> >>>>
> >>>>David
> ><< >>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >For additional commands, e-mail:
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message