Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-tomcat-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 54670 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2003 06:12:28 -0000 Received: from exchange.sun.com (192.18.33.10) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Jun 2003 06:12:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 12226 invoked by uid 97); 6 Jun 2003 06:14:53 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-tomcat-dev@nagoya.betaversion.org Received: (qmail 12219 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2003 06:14:52 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by nagoya.betaversion.org with SMTP; 6 Jun 2003 06:14:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 53826 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jun 2003 06:12:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Tomcat Developers List" Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 53811 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2003 06:12:17 -0000 Received: from main.gmane.org (80.91.224.249) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Jun 2003 06:12:17 -0000 Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19OAQN-0006Tk-00 for ; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 08:10:03 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19OAQ5-0006SM-00 for ; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 08:09:45 +0200 From: Costin Manolache Subject: Re: [5.0] More dependencies Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 01:29:36 -0700 Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: <20030603062602.14991.qmail@nagoya.betaversion.org> <3EDCB162.9040806@apache.org> <3EDF9B7D.2010107@apache.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 Sender: news X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Remy Maucherat wrote: > In this email, I forgot to speak about other commons (and others) > dependencies. Thanks for all the volunteering, BTW, it really helps > (damn day job ...) :) +1 :-) > JMX: I think we should try to ship with JMX 1.2 + a JSR 160 > implementation if possible. I really hope MX4J will be able to provide > that. I think we must ship with JMX1.2 - AFAIK MX4J is close, but it may be better to use JMX-RI for this one. If I remember the terms on the licence are different from the previous one - but someone should confirm if we can redistribute it. > Tyrex: This project seems dead (unfortunately) :-( We could replace it > with some other TM, or (I like that one better) not provide an object > factory implementation for UserTransaction by default, and let third > parties provide it. That model seems to work great for J2EE providers > (JOTM, OpenEJB, etc). +1 on no TM. If someone needs a TM - he can choose whatever fits. This will also reduce the size of tomcat :-) > Struts: We need 1.1 ! (I think the rest of the world does also :-D) > > Watchdog: (to the Sun folks) Where is Watchdog 5 (or whatever it's called) > ? > > Remy Costin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org