Menu
▾
▴
springframework-developer
|
From: <jue...@we...> - 2003-04-27 12:03:40
|
SXNhYmVsbGUsIFJvZCwNCiANCkZpcnN0IG9mIGFsbCwgSSBsaWtlIHRoZSBpZGVhIG9mIHRoZSB0 d28gdHJhaWxzLiBDb3ZlcmluZyBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBidWlsZGluZyBhbmQgdGhlIG1haW4gYXJl YXMgb2YgZnVuY3Rpb25hbGl0eSAodGhhdCBhcmUgdXNhYmxlIG9uIHRoZWlyIG93biwgbW9zdGx5 KSBzZXBhcmF0ZWx5IG1ha2VzIHNlbnNlLiBUaGlzIGRlbW9uc3RyYXRlcyB0aGF0IFNwcmluZyBp c24ndCBhICJkbyBldmVyeXRoaW5nIGluIG91ciB3YXkgb3IgbGVhdmUgaXQiIGtpbmQgb2YgZnJh bWV3b3JrLCBsaWtlIHNvIG1hbnkgc28tY2FsbGVkICJhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBmcmFtZXdvcmtzIiwg YnV0IGEgdmVyeSBtb2R1bGFyIGFuZCBub24taW50cnVzaXZlIGVmZm9ydC4NCiANClJlZ2FyZGlu ZyBkZW1vIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucyBhbmQgd2ViIHNlcnZlcnM6IE9mIGNvdXJzZSwgU3ByaW5nIGlz IGFib3V0IEoyRUUgaW4gZ2VuZXJhbCwgc28gd2UgZGVmaW5pdGVseSBuZWVkIGFuIGFkdmFuY2Vk IGRlbW8sIHV0aWxpemluZyBKVEEgYW5kIFNlc3Npb24gQmVhbnMgYXQgbGVhc3QsIG1heWJlIGV2 ZW4gYWNjZXNzaW5nIHR3byBkYXRhc291cmNlcyAtIHRodXMgcnVubmluZyBvbiBhICJmdWxsIiBK MkVFIHNlcnZlci4gSSBjb25zaWRlciBPcmlvbiAyLjAgYSBnb29kIGNob2ljZSBoZXJlLCBJIHdv dWxkbid0IG1pbmQgSkJvc3MgMy4yIGVpdGhlci4gSSd2ZSB1c2VkIEpSdW4gMy4wLCAzLjEsIGFu ZCA0LjAsIGFuZCBJJ20gcGxlYXNlZCB0aGF0IDQuMCBpcyBhIG1ham9yIHN0ZXAgZm9yd2FyZCAo SSB3YXNuJ3QgaGFwcHkgd2l0aCAzLjAsIHRvbyBidWdneSBpbiBjZXJ0YWluIGFyZWFzKSwgYnV0 IEknZCBwcmVmZXIgT3Jpb24gYW5kL29yIEpCb3NzLg0KIA0KVG8gYXZvaWQgYmVpbmcgbWlzdW5k ZXJzdG9vZDogSSBkb24ndCBoYXZlIGFueSBvYmplY3Rpb25zIHRvIEpCb3NzIGF0IGFsbCwgSSBq dXN0IHdvdWxkbid0IHJlcXVpcmUgaXQgZm9yIHRoZSBub24tRUpCIHNpbmdsZS1yZXNvdXJjZSBk ZW1vIHdlYiBhcHAuIFBlcnNvbmFsbHksIEkgd291bGRuJ3QgbWluZCBzZXR0aW5nIGl0IHVwIGZv ciBzb21lIGRlbW8gYXBwLCBidXQgSSBrbm93IHF1aXRlIGEgbG90IG9mIHBlb3BsZSB0aGF0IHdv dWxkbid0IGFwcHJlY2lhdGUgdGhhdCBhcyBhIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50IGZvciBhIGRlbW8gd2ViIGFw cC4gSSBjYW4gdW5kZXJzdGFuZCB0aGF0LCBhcyBmb3IgZXhhbXBsZSBKQm9zcycgb25saW5lIGRv Y3MgYXJlIHJlYWxseSBzcGFyc2UsIG9yIHJhdGhlciBwcmFjdGljYWxseSBub24tZXhpc3RlbnQu IE9mIGNvdXJzZSwgc2V0dGluZyBpdCB1cCBpc24ndCByZWFsbHkgaGFyZCAtIGlmIHlvdSBjYW4g ZmlndXJlIG91dCBob3cgdG8gZG8gaXQgb25jZS4gQnV0IHRoZSBsYXR0ZXIgaXMgbWFnbml0dWRl cyBoYXJkIHRoYW4gd2l0aCBUb21jYXQgb3IgUmVzaW4sIGVzcGVjaWFsbHkgZm9yIGEgbm90IHRv byBKMkVFLWV4cGVyaWVuY2VkIEphdmEgd2ViIGFwcCBkZXZlbG9wZXIuDQogDQpNeSBub24tSlRB IHRyYW5zYWN0aW9uIG1hbmFnZW1lbnQgcHJvcG9zYWwgZm9yIHRoZSBzaW5nbGUgcmVzb3VyY2Ug Y2FzZSBpcyBtYWlubHkgYWRkcmVzc2luZyB0aGUgbGF0dGVyIGF1ZGllbmNlIHRvby4gSSdkIGxp a2UgdG8gaW50cm9kdWNlIGRldmVsb3BlcnMgdGhhdCBrbm93IFNlcnZsZXRzL0pTUHMvSk5ESSBy ZXNvdXJjZXMgKGJ1dCBub3QgdGhlIHJlc3Qgb2YgSjJFRSkgdG8gaGlnaC1sZXZlbCB0cmFuc2Fj dGlvbiBtYW5hZ2VtZW50LCBldmVuIGZvciBhIHNpbmdsZSByZXNvdXJjZS4gRHVlIHRvIFNwcmlu ZydzIGNvbmZpZ3VyYWJsZSB0cmFuc2FjdGlvbiBzdHJhdGVneSwgdGhpcyBzaG91bGQgYmUgYWNo aWV2YWJsZSB1c2luZyB0aGUgc2FtZSBjb2RpbmcgcGF0dGVybnMgYXMgaW4gdGhlIG11bHRpcGxl IHJlc291cmNlL0pUQSBjYXNlLCBqdXN0IGNvbmZpZ3VyZWQgdG8gYSBkaWZmZXJlbnQgUGxhdGZv cm1UcmFuc2FjdGlvbk1hbmFnZXIgaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb24uIEJUVywgdGhlIGFscmVhZHkgZXhp c3RpbmcgU2luZ2xlQ29ubmVjdGlvblRyYW5zYWN0aW9uTWFuYWdlciBpcyBtZWFudCB0byBwcm92 aWRlIHRoZSBzYW1lIGNvZGluZyBwYXR0ZXJuIGZvciBzdGFuZGFsb25lIGFwcHMsIHdpdGggYSBt YW51YWxseSBib290c3RyYXBwZWQgbm9uLXBvb2xlZCBkYXRhc291cmNlIHVuZGVybmVhdGggLSB0 byBiZSBhYmxlIHRvIHJldXNlIGNvbnRhaW5lci1jYXBhYmxlIGJ1c2luZXNzIGxvZ2ljLg0KIA0K QSBmdXJ0aGVyIGlzc3VlIGlzIHRoYXQgdXNpbmcgSlRBIGZvciB0cmFuc2FjdGlvbiBtYW5hZ2Vt ZW50IGRvZXMgbm90IG9ubHkgbWVhbiByZXF1aXJpbmcgYSBjb250YWluZXIgd2l0aCBKVEEgc3Vw cG9ydCwgYnV0IGFsc28gaW50ZWdyYXRpbmcgcGVyc2lzdGVuY2UgdG9vbGtpdHMgdmlhIEpDQSwg Zm9yIHByb3BlciB0cmFuc2FjdGlvbmFsIGNhY2hpbmcgZXRjLiBJbiB0aGUgbm9uLUpUQSBjYXNl LCBhIFBsYXRmb3JtVHJhbnNhY3Rpb25NYW5hZ2VyIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9uIGZvciB0aGUgcmVz cGVjdGl2ZSB0b29sa2l0J3MgbmF0aXZlIHRyYW5zYWN0aW9uIGhhbmRsaW5nIGNvdWxkIGRvIHRo ZSBqb2IgdG9vLCB3aXRob3V0IHdvcnJ5aW5nIGFib3V0IEpDQSBzdXBwb3J0IGluIHRoZSBjb250 YWluZXIgb3IgSkNBIHNldHVwIGRldGFpbHMuDQogDQpGaW5hbGx5LCBKZXR0eSBpcyBkZWZpbml0 ZWx5IGEgbmljZSBzZXJ2bGV0IGNvbnRhaW5lci4gSSB3b3VsZG4ndCB1c2UgVG9tY2F0IHdpdGgg SkJvc3MsIGZvciBleGFtcGxlLCBidXQgcHJlZmVyIEpCb3NzV2ViIGFrYSB0aGUgaW50ZWdyYXRl ZCBKZXR0eS4gT2YgY291cnNlLCBKZXR0eSBkb2Vzbid0IHRyeSB0byBiZSBhICJKMkVFIHdlYiBh cHAgc2VydmVyIiBidXQganVzdCBhIHNlcnZsZXQgY29udGFpbmVyOiBGb3IgSk5ESSBEYXRhU291 cmNlcywgSlRBIHN1cHBvcnQsIGFuZCB0aGUgbGlrZSwgR3JlZyBzdWdnZXN0cyB0byB1c2UgdGhl IEpCb3NzIGludGVncmF0aW9uLg0KIA0KUmVnYXJkcywNCkp1ZXJnZW4NCiANCiANCg0KCS0tLS0t VXJzcHLDvG5nbGljaGUgTmFjaHJpY2h0LS0tLS0gDQoJVm9uOiBJc2FiZWxsZSBNdXN6eW5za2kg W21haWx0bzppc2FiZWxsZUBtZXRhLWxvZ2l4LmNvbV0gDQoJR2VzZW5kZXQ6IFNvIDI3LjA0LjIw MDMgMTI6MTcgDQoJQW46IFJvZCBKb2huc29uIA0KCUNjOiBzcHJpbmdmcmFtZXdvcmstZGV2ZWxv cGVyQGxpc3RzLnNvdXJjZWZvcmdlLm5ldCANCglCZXRyZWZmOiBSZTogW1NwcmluZ2ZyYW1ld29y ay1kZXZlbG9wZXJdIGRhdGFiYXNlIGZvciBkZW1vcw0KCQ0KCQ0KDQoJSSBoYXZlIG5vIHByb2Js ZW0gd2l0aCBPcmlvbi4gU28gdG8gc3VtbWFyaXplLCB3ZSB3aWxsIHVzZSBqdXN0IFRvbWNhdCBm b3IgdGhlIHBhcnRzIHRoYXQgaGF2ZSBubyB0cmFuc2FjdGlvbmFsIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cywgZS5n LiBkZW1vbnN0cmF0aW5nIGJhc2ljIEpEQkMgZnVudGlvbmFsaXR5IGluIHRoZSBmcmFtZXdvcmsu IFRoZSBkZW1vIGFwcCBjYW4gdGhlbiB1c2UgT3Jpb24uDQoJQnkgdGhlIHdheSwgbWF5YmUgSSBk aWRuJ3QgbWFrZSB0aGlzIGNsZWFyIGluIHRoZSBwYXN0IGJ1dCBJIHBsYW4gb24gdHdvIHRyYWls cyBpbiB0aGUgZGVtb3MuIE9uZSB0cmFpbCBpcyB0aGUgcGV0Y2xpbmljLCB3aGljaCBpcyBhYm91 dCBidWlsZGluZyBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgd2l0aCBTcHJpbmcuIFRoZSBvdGhlciB0cmFpbCBpcyBt YWRlIHVwIG9mIHN1YnRyYWlscyBjb3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIHRvIHRoZSBtYWluIGFyZWFzIG9mIGZ1 bmN0aW9uYWxpdHkgY292ZXJlZCBieSBTcHJpbmcuIFNvIHRoZXJlIHdvdWxkIGJlIGEgSkRCQyBz dWJ0cmFpbCwgYSBiZWFuIHN1YnRyYWlsIGV0Yy4NCgkNCglJc2FiZWxsZQ0KCQ0KCU9uIFN1biwg QXByIDI3LCAyMDAzIGF0IDEwOjU1OjQyQU0gKzAxMDAsIFJvZCBKb2huc29uIHdyb3RlOg0KCT4g TXkgdGhvdWdodHMgb24gYXBwIHNlcnZlcnM6DQoJPg0KCT4gMS4gU3ByaW5nIGlzIGFib3V0IEoy RUUsIG5vdCBqdXN0IHRoZSBTZXJ2bGV0IEFQSS4gVGhpcyBtZWFucyB0aGF0IEpUQSBpcw0KCT4g cGFydCBvZiB0aGUgcGljdHVyZSwgd2hpY2ggd29ycmllcyBtZSBhYm91dCBUb21jYXQuDQoJPiAy LiBQZXJzb25hbGx5IEkndmUgZm91bmQgSkJvc3MgcHJldHR5IGVhc3kgdG8gc2V0IHVwLCB3aXRo IGEgc2luZ2xlIFhNTCBmaWxlDQoJPiB0byBkZWZpbmUgY29ubmVjdGlvbiBwb29scyBldGMuDQoJ PiAzLiBJIHRoaW5rIFdMUyBpcyBhIGdvb2QgaGlnaC1lbmQgY29udGFpbmVyLCBidXQgSSBhYnNv bHV0ZWx5IGRvbid0IGZhdm91cg0KCT4gdXNpbmcgaXQgZm9yIHRoZSBkZW1vLiBJdCdzIHdheSB0 b28gaGVhdnl3ZWlnaHQuDQoJPiA0LiBPcmlvbiB2cyBKUnVuOiBJIGxpa2UgT3Jpb24gYSBsb3Qu IEkgaGF2ZW4ndCB0cmllZCAyLjAgeWV0LCBidXQgaXQncw0KCT4gYWx3YXlzIGJlZW4gaW5jcmVk aWJseSBmYXN0IHRvIGRlcGxveS4gIEkgaGFkIHN1Y2ggYSBkcmVhZGZ1bCBleHBlcmllbmNlDQoJ PiB3aXRoIEpSdW4gMy4wIHRoYXQgSSdtIHZlcnkgcHJlanVkaWNlZCBub3cuIEknbSBzdXJlIDQu MCBpcyB3YXkgYmV0dGVyLiBCdXQNCgk+IEkgd291bGQgZGVmaW5pdGVseSB2b3RlIGZvciBPcmlv biBvZiB0aGUgdHdvLCBhcyBpdCdzIHNvIGxpZ2h0d2VpZ2h0LiBBbHNvDQoJPiBpdCdzIHRoZSBi YXNpcyBmb3IgT3JhY2xlIDlpQVMsIHdoaWNoIEkgdGhpbmsgd2lsbCBiZWNvbWUgYSBtYWpvciBw bGF5ZXIuDQoJPg0KCT4gSSB2b3RlIHRoYXQgd2UgaGF2ZQ0KCT4gLSBhIGJhc2ljIGRlbW8gdGhh dCB3b3JrcyBvbiBUb21jYXQgKGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaXMgdGhlIHJlZiBpbXBsKSBhbmQgT3Jpb24u DQoJPiBOb24gdHJhbnNhY3Rpb25hbC4gV2lsbCB0aGluayBhYm91dCBKdWVyZ2VuJ3MgaW1wbGVt ZW50YXRpb24gc3VnZ2VzdGlvbiBmb3INCgk+IHRoaXMuIEkgd2FzIHRoaW5raW5nIGFib3V0IHNv bWV0aGluZyBhbG9uZyB0aGVzZSBsaW5lcyB0aGlzIG1vcm5pbmcsIGJ1dA0KCT4gSnVlcmdlbidz IHByb3Bvc2FsIGlzIGJldHRlciB3b3JrZWQgb3V0Lg0KCT4gLW1vcmUgYWR2YW5jZWQgZGVtbyBv biBPcmlvbi4gV2l0aCBpbnN0cnVjdGlvbnMgZm9yIEpSdW4sIFRvbWNhdC9UeXJleCwgV0xTDQoJ PiBhcyBleHRyYXMgd2hlbiB3ZSBnZXQgcm91bmQgdG8gaXQuDQoJPg0KCT4gSSdtIGFsc28gYSBK ZXR0eSBmYW4sIGJ1dCB0aGF0J3MgcGFydGx5IGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgd2FzIHdyaXR0ZW4gYnkgYSBm cmllbmQNCgk+IG9mIGEgZnJpZW5kIHdobyB3ZW50IHRvIHRoZSBzYW1lIHVuaXZlcnNpdHkgYXMg SSBkaWQuDQoJPg0KCT4gUmVnYXJkcywNCgk+IFJvZA0KCT4NCgk+IC0tLS0tIE9yaWdpbmFsIE1l c3NhZ2UgLS0tLS0NCgk+IEZyb206ICJJc2FiZWxsZSBNdXN6eW5za2kiIDxpc2FiZWxsZUBtZXRh LWxvZ2l4LmNvbT4NCgk+IFRvOiA8c3ByaW5nZnJhbWV3b3JrLWRldmVsb3BlckBsaXN0cy5zb3Vy Y2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQ+DQoJPiBTZW50OiBTdW5kYXksIEFwcmlsIDI3LCAyMDAzIDg6NTYgQU0NCgk+ IFN1YmplY3Q6IFtTcHJpbmdmcmFtZXdvcmstZGV2ZWxvcGVyXSBkYXRhYmFzZSBmb3IgZGVtb3MN Cgk+DQoJPg0KCT4gPiBIaSBndXlzLA0KCT4gPg0KCT4gPiBBIGxvdCBvZiBhY3Rpdml0eSBvbiB0 aGUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IG92ZXJuaWdodCEgQSBjb3VwbGUgb2YgdGhvdWdodHMgOg0KCT4gPg0K CT4gPiAoMSkgVGhlIGRhdGFiYXNlLiBJJ20gaW4gZmF2b3Igb2YgbXlTUUwgYmVjYXVzZSBhIGxv dCBvZiBkb2N1bWVudGF0aW9uIGNhbg0KCT4gYmUgZm91bmQgZm9yIGl0IGFuZCBpcyBtb3Zpbmcg bW9yZSBhbmQgbW9yZSB0b3dhcmRzIGEgdmVyeSBtYXR1cmUgcHJvZHVjdC4NCgk+IEl0IGlzIGFs c28gdmVyeSB3aWRlc3ByZWFkLCBmb3IgZXguIGFsbCB0aGUgd2ViaG9zdGVycyBJIGtub3cgYXJl IG9mZmVyaW5nDQoJPiBpdC4gQW5kIGl0J3MgcmVhbGx5IGEgcGx1cyB0aGF0IG9uZSBjYW4gZmlu ZCBnb29kIGJvb2tzIGFib3V0IGl0LCBiZXNpZGVzDQoJPiBhbGwgdGhlIGluZm8gb24gdGhlIHdl Yi4gUGx1cyBpdCBjb21lcyBwcmUtaW5zdGFsbGVkIG9uIGxpbnV4IGJveGVzLg0KCT4gPiAoMikg VGhlIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHNlcnZlci4gSSB0aGluayBKQm9zcyBpcyBtb3ZpbmcgYXdheSBmcm9t IHRoZSBvcGVuDQoJPiBzb3VyY2Ugc3Bpcml0LCBhbmQgaW4gYWRkaXRpb24gaXQgaXMgcXVpdGUg aGFyZCB0byBjdXN0b21pemUgKGRhdGFzb3VyY2VzDQoJPiBldGMpLiBBbmQgeW91IGhhdmUgdG8g c2hlbGwgb3V0IG1vbmV5IGZvciB0aGUgZG9jcyBvciBidXkgYSBib29rLiBTbyBpZiB3ZQ0KCT4g Zm9yZ2V0IGFib3V0IHRoZSBvcGVuIHNvdXJjZSBhc3BlY3QgZm9yIGEgbWludXRlLCBpdCBzZWVt cyB0byBtZSB3ZSBhcmUgbGVmdA0KCT4gd2l0aCAyIG9wdGlvbnMgOiBPcmlvbiBhbmQgSlJ1biwg Ym90aCBmcmVlIGZvciBkZXZlbG9wZXJzLiBJdCdzIGJlZW4gYSB3aGlsZQ0KCT4gc2luY2UgSSd2 ZSB3b3JrZWQgd2l0aCBPcmlvbiwgYnV0IGhhdmUgaGVhcmQgZ29vZCB0aGluZ3MgYWJvdXQgaXQu IEknbSB1c2luZw0KCT4gSlJ1biwgYW5kIGFtIHF1aXRlIHBsZWFzZWQgd2l0aCBpdC4NCgk+ID4g KDMpIFRoZSBsb2dvLiBXZSBzaG91bGRuJ3QgbWl4IG1ldGFwaG9ycywgc28gaWYgd2UgZ28gd2l0 aCB0aGUgc3ByaW5nIGZvcg0KCT4gdGhlIGxldHRlciBpLCB0aGVuIHdlIHNob3VsZG4ndCB1c2Ug YSBjaGVycnkgYmxvc3NvbSBvciB3aGF0ZXZlciBmb3IgdGhlDQoJPiBjYXJ0b29uLg0KCT4gPg0K CT4gPiBJc2FiZWxsZQ0KCT4gPg0KCT4gPiAtLQ0KCT4gPiBJc2FiZWxsZSBNdXN6eW5za2kNCgk+ ID4gU29mdHdhcmUgRW5naW5lZXINCgk+ID4gWmFuZHdlZWxsYWFuIDQNCgk+ID4gMjY2MCBBbnR3 ZXJwZW4NCgk+ID4gQmVsZ2l1bQ0KCT4gPiBUZWwuIDMyLSgwKTMtODMwIDE4IDU0DQoJPiA+IE1v YmlsZTogMzItKDApNDg1IDQ5IDUwIDg5DQoJPiA+IEVtYWlsOiBpc2FiZWxsZUBtZXRhLWxvZ2l4 LmNvbQ0KCT4gPiBXZWJzaXRlOiB3d3cubWV0YS1sb2dpeC5jb20NCgk+ID4NCgk+ID4NCgk+ID4g LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0K CT4gPiBUaGlzIHNmLm5ldCBlbWFpbCBpcyBzcG9uc29yZWQgYnk6VGhpbmtHZWVrDQoJPiA+IFdl bGNvbWUgdG8gZ2VlayBoZWF2ZW4uDQoJPiA+IGh0dHA6Ly90aGlua2dlZWsuY29tL3NmDQoJPiA+ IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQoJPiA+IFNw cmluZ2ZyYW1ld29yay1kZXZlbG9wZXIgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQoJPiA+IFNwcmluZ2ZyYW1ld29y ay1kZXZlbG9wZXJAbGlzdHMuc291cmNlZm9yZ2UubmV0DQoJPiA+IGh0dHBzOi8vbGlzdHMuc291 cmNlZm9yZ2UubmV0L2xpc3RzL2xpc3RpbmZvL3NwcmluZ2ZyYW1ld29yay1kZXZlbG9wZXINCgk+ DQoJPg0KCT4NCgk+DQoJPiAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQoJPiBUaGlzIHNmLm5ldCBlbWFpbCBpcyBzcG9uc29yZWQgYnk6VGhp bmtHZWVrDQoJPiBXZWxjb21lIHRvIGdlZWsgaGVhdmVuLg0KCT4gaHR0cDovL3RoaW5rZ2Vlay5j b20vc2YNCgk+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQoJPiBTcHJpbmdmcmFtZXdvcmstZGV2ZWxvcGVyIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KCT4gU3ByaW5nZnJh bWV3b3JrLWRldmVsb3BlckBsaXN0cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQNCgk+IGh0dHBzOi8vbGlzdHMu c291cmNlZm9yZ2UubmV0L2xpc3RzL2xpc3RpbmZvL3NwcmluZ2ZyYW1ld29yay1kZXZlbG9wZXIN Cgk+DQoJPg0KCQ0KCS0tDQoJSXNhYmVsbGUgTXVzenluc2tpDQoJU29mdHdhcmUgRW5naW5lZXIN CglaYW5kd2VlbGxhYW4gNA0KCTI2NjAgQW50d2VycGVuDQoJQmVsZ2l1bQ0KCVRlbC4gMzItKDAp My04MzAgMTggNTQNCglNb2JpbGU6IDMyLSgwKTQ4NSA0OSA1MCA4OQ0KCUVtYWlsOiBpc2FiZWxs ZUBtZXRhLWxvZ2l4LmNvbQ0KCVdlYnNpdGU6IHd3dy5tZXRhLWxvZ2l4LmNvbQ0KCQ0KCQ0KCS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NCglU aGlzIHNmLm5ldCBlbWFpbCBpcyBzcG9uc29yZWQgYnk6VGhpbmtHZWVrDQoJV2VsY29tZSB0byBn ZWVrIGhlYXZlbi4NCglodHRwOi8vdGhpbmtnZWVrLmNvbS9zZg0KCV9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQoJU3ByaW5nZnJhbWV3b3JrLWRldmVsb3Bl ciBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCglTcHJpbmdmcmFtZXdvcmstZGV2ZWxvcGVyQGxpc3RzLnNvdXJjZWZv cmdlLm5ldA0KCWh0dHBzOi8vbGlzdHMuc291cmNlZm9yZ2UubmV0L2xpc3RzL2xpc3RpbmZvL3Nw cmluZ2ZyYW1ld29yay1kZXZlbG9wZXINCgkNCg0K |
|
From: Thomas R. <tri...@tr...> - 2003-04-27 15:46:48
|
Hi all, This has been a busy weekend and I think we are making great progress. A few comments: > (1) The database. I'm in favor of mySQL because a lot of documentation can be found for it and is moving more and more towards a very mature product. It is also very widespread, for ex. all the webhosters I know are offering it. And it's really a plus that one can find good books about it, besides all the info on the web. Plus it comes pre-installed on linux boxes. My guess is that the vast majority of all MySQL installations don't have InnoDB support enabled. This means that you don't have any transaction support. Configuring MySQL to use InnoDB is not that hard, but it still requires an additional step. Installing HSQLDB is a nobrainer and any JDBC book should give you enough info on how to use it. > (2) The application server. I think JBoss is moving away from the open source spirit, and in addition it is quite hard to customize (datasources etc). And you have to shell out money for the docs or buy a book. So if we forget about the open source aspect for a minute, it seems to me we are left with 2 options : Orion and JRun, both free for developers. It's been a while since I've worked with Orion, but have heard good things about it. I'm using JRun, and am quite pleased with it. I don't agree with you that JBoss is moving away from the open source spirit - they are just trying to capitalize on their hard work. The source is still available for JBoss. Even if they were, they are still more open than our other choices. I think we should select an app server based on the services/features that we require and the ease of configuring these services. I have some JBoss experience but almost no Orion experience so I am going by what I can quickkly learn from their documentation. Both JBoss and Orion are very easy to install -- unzip. Adding a Datasource seems to be much easier in Orion. The JBoss configuration seems much more complex. However, JBoss is based on JMX and if we could run a script that configures everything we need, then this would be less of an issue. Coming from a datbase beckground where you can do pretty much anything from SQL/DDL scripts, it has always surprised me that there has been little support by the app server vendors for scripted configuration of their servers. Having someone manually modifying configuration files on a production server seems very error prone to me. There is some new development in this area though. You can configure some WebLogic services using WLScript, and 8.1 is supposed to come with Ant tasks for configuring the MBeans. There is an open source project JMX4Ant (http://jmx4ant.sourceforge.net/) that does provide Ant tasks for JMX enabled app servers. It currently supports WebLogic and JBoss. I planning on trying this out next week and I will let you know if this would help us in the configuration area. It would be nice to have a few Ant targets for installing and configuring the required app server. > (3) The logo. We shouldn't mix metaphors, so if we go with the spring for the letter i, then we shouldn't use a cherry blossom or whatever for the cartoon. Agree, we should pick one or the other. Thomas |
|
From: Isabelle M. <isa...@me...> - 2003-04-27 20:13:06
|
Hi Thomas, I'll try to get HSQLDB working this week. I'm not rabid about the DB issue, whatever works. Are there tools to create tables etc? With MySQL there is a choice of tools, and I think that's important for our prospective tutorial users (i.e. not force them to work straight with DDL). JBoss - I've actually nothing against it, except that i think it's hard to configure for novices. And I certainly have nothing against teh JBoss guys trying to capitalize on their hard work. But it has become almost impossible to find anything useful on their site. There are no samples, no tutorials, and all the links to old versions/tutorials/docs are broken. So it's shell out or starve. And that to me is against the spirit of open source. People will end up paying for JBoss because that's the only way to get any docs or support. And that's wrong. There should be free docs and free community support. If anyone ends up paying for support, it should be because they want their hands held. If JMX4ant works well that would indeed help. Isabelle On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 11:46:50AM -0400, Thomas Risberg wrote: > Hi all, > > This has been a busy weekend and I think we are making great progress. > > A few comments: > > > (1) The database. I'm in favor of mySQL because a lot of documentation > can be found for it and is moving more and more towards a very mature > product. It is also very widespread, for ex. all the webhosters I know > are offering it. And it's really a plus that one can find good books > about it, besides all the info on the web. Plus it comes pre-installed > on linux boxes. > > My guess is that the vast majority of all MySQL installations don't have > InnoDB support enabled. This means that you don't have any transaction > support. Configuring MySQL to use InnoDB is not that hard, but it still > requires an additional step. Installing HSQLDB is a nobrainer and any > JDBC book should give you enough info on how to use it. > > > (2) The application server. I think JBoss is moving away from the open > source spirit, and in addition it is quite hard to customize > (datasources etc). And you have to shell out money for the docs or buy a > book. So if we forget about the open source aspect for a minute, it > seems to me we are left with 2 options : Orion and JRun, both free for > developers. It's been a while since I've worked with Orion, but have > heard good things about it. I'm using JRun, and am quite pleased with it. > > I don't agree with you that JBoss is moving away from the open source > spirit - they are just trying to capitalize on their hard work. The > source is still available for JBoss. Even if they were, they are still > more open than our other choices. > > I think we should select an app server based on the services/features > that we require and the ease of configuring these services. I have some > JBoss experience but almost no Orion experience so I am going by what I > can quickkly learn from their documentation. > > Both JBoss and Orion are very easy to install -- unzip. > > Adding a Datasource seems to be much easier in Orion. The JBoss > configuration seems much more complex. However, JBoss is based on JMX > and if we could run a script that configures everything we need, then > this would be less of an issue. > > Coming from a datbase beckground where you can do pretty much anything > from SQL/DDL scripts, it has always surprised me that there has been > little support by the app server vendors for scripted configuration of > their servers. Having someone manually modifying configuration files on > a production server seems very error prone to me. There is some new > development in this area though. You can configure some WebLogic > services using WLScript, and 8.1 is supposed to come with Ant tasks for > configuring the MBeans. > > There is an open source project JMX4Ant > (http://jmx4ant.sourceforge.net/) that does provide Ant tasks for JMX > enabled app servers. It currently supports WebLogic and JBoss. I > planning on trying this out next week and I will let you know if this > would help us in the configuration area. It would be nice to have a few > Ant targets for installing and configuring the required app server. > > > (3) The logo. We shouldn't mix metaphors, so if we go with the spring > for the letter i, then we shouldn't use a cherry blossom or whatever > for the cartoon. > > Agree, we should pick one or the other. > > Thomas > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > > -- Isabelle Muszynski Software Engineer Zandweellaan 4 2660 Antwerpen Belgium Tel. 32-(0)3-830 18 54 Mobile: 32-(0)485 49 50 89 Email: isa...@me... Website: www.meta-logix.com |
|
From: Rod J. <rod...@in...> - 2003-04-27 21:26:41
|
I think the idea of making money through the docs is absurd, both as part of a business model and on principle. And when another publisher publishes a book on JBoss (as with the recent Wrox book) the JBoss guys go onto The ServerSide and their own forums and tell people not to buy that book. I felt quite angry about that, as I know the author of the JBoss book. Regards, Rod > JBoss - I've actually nothing against it, except that i think it's hard to configure for novices. And I certainly have nothing against teh JBoss guys trying to capitalize on their hard work. But it has become almost impossible to find anything useful on their site. There are no samples, no tutorials, and all the links to old versions/tutorials/docs are broken. So it's shell out or starve. And that to me is against the spirit of open source. People will end up paying for JBoss because that's the only way to get any docs or support. And that's wrong. There should be free docs and free community support. If anyone ends up paying for support, it should be because they want their hands held. > > If JMX4ant works well that would indeed help. > > Isabelle > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 11:46:50AM -0400, Thomas Risberg wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This has been a busy weekend and I think we are making great progress. > > > > A few comments: > > > > > (1) The database. I'm in favor of mySQL because a lot of documentation > > can be found for it and is moving more and more towards a very mature > > product. It is also very widespread, for ex. all the webhosters I know > > are offering it. And it's really a plus that one can find good books > > about it, besides all the info on the web. Plus it comes pre-installed > > on linux boxes. > > > > My guess is that the vast majority of all MySQL installations don't have > > InnoDB support enabled. This means that you don't have any transaction > > support. Configuring MySQL to use InnoDB is not that hard, but it still > > requires an additional step. Installing HSQLDB is a nobrainer and any > > JDBC book should give you enough info on how to use it. > > > > > (2) The application server. I think JBoss is moving away from the open > > source spirit, and in addition it is quite hard to customize > > (datasources etc). And you have to shell out money for the docs or buy a > > book. So if we forget about the open source aspect for a minute, it > > seems to me we are left with 2 options : Orion and JRun, both free for > > developers. It's been a while since I've worked with Orion, but have > > heard good things about it. I'm using JRun, and am quite pleased with it. > > > > I don't agree with you that JBoss is moving away from the open source > > spirit - they are just trying to capitalize on their hard work. The > > source is still available for JBoss. Even if they were, they are still > > more open than our other choices. > > > > I think we should select an app server based on the services/features > > that we require and the ease of configuring these services. I have some > > JBoss experience but almost no Orion experience so I am going by what I > > can quickkly learn from their documentation. > > > > Both JBoss and Orion are very easy to install -- unzip. > > > > Adding a Datasource seems to be much easier in Orion. The JBoss > > configuration seems much more complex. However, JBoss is based on JMX > > and if we could run a script that configures everything we need, then > > this would be less of an issue. > > > > Coming from a datbase beckground where you can do pretty much anything > > from SQL/DDL scripts, it has always surprised me that there has been > > little support by the app server vendors for scripted configuration of > > their servers. Having someone manually modifying configuration files on > > a production server seems very error prone to me. There is some new > > development in this area though. You can configure some WebLogic > > services using WLScript, and 8.1 is supposed to come with Ant tasks for > > configuring the MBeans. > > > > There is an open source project JMX4Ant > > (http://jmx4ant.sourceforge.net/) that does provide Ant tasks for JMX > > enabled app servers. It currently supports WebLogic and JBoss. I > > planning on trying this out next week and I will let you know if this > > would help us in the configuration area. It would be nice to have a few > > Ant targets for installing and configuring the required app server. > > > > > (3) The logo. We shouldn't mix metaphors, so if we go with the spring > > for the letter i, then we shouldn't use a cherry blossom or whatever > > for the cartoon. > > > > Agree, we should pick one or the other. > > > > Thomas > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > _______________________________________________ > > Springframework-developer mailing list > > Spr...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > > > > > > -- > Isabelle Muszynski > Software Engineer > Zandweellaan 4 > 2660 Antwerpen > Belgium > Tel. 32-(0)3-830 18 54 > Mobile: 32-(0)485 49 50 89 > Email: isa...@me... > Website: www.meta-logix.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer |
|
From: Thomas R. <tri...@tr...> - 2003-04-27 20:44:13
|
Isabelle, O'Reilly is publishing companion books to Monson_Haefel's "Enterprise Java Beans". There is a beta version of the JBoss 3.0 one available for free at http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/entjbeans3/workbooks/index.html I just read parts of it and there is a default datasource for HSQLDB already set up "java:/DefaultDS". It also mentions that you can just copy configuration files into the "deploy" directory and anything named *-service.xml is hot deployed. That way we could just provide configuration files and, using an Ant task, copy them to the deploy directory. Thomas > Hi Thomas, > > I'll try to get HSQLDB working this week. I'm not rabid about the DB issue, whatever works. Are there tools to create tables etc? With MySQL there is a choice of tools, and I think that's important for our prospective tutorial users (i.e. not force them to work straight with DDL). > > JBoss - I've actually nothing against it, except that i think it's hard to configure for novices. And I certainly have nothing against teh JBoss guys trying to capitalize on their hard work. But it has become almost impossible to find anything useful on their site. There are no samples, no tutorials, and all the links to old versions/tutorials/docs are broken. So it's shell out or starve. And that to me is against the spirit of open source. People will end up paying for JBoss because that's the only way to get any docs or support. And that's wrong. There should be free docs and free community support. If anyone ends up paying for support, it should be because they want their hands held. > > If JMX4ant works well that would indeed help. > > Isabelle > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 11:46:50AM -0400, Thomas Risberg wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This has been a busy weekend and I think we are making great progress. > > > > A few comments: > > > > > (1) The database. I'm in favor of mySQL because a lot of documentation > > can be found for it and is moving more and more towards a very mature > > product. It is also very widespread, for ex. all the webhosters I know > > are offering it. And it's really a plus that one can find good books > > about it, besides all the info on the web. Plus it comes pre-installed > > on linux boxes. > > > > My guess is that the vast majority of all MySQL installations don't have > > InnoDB support enabled. This means that you don't have any transaction > > support. Configuring MySQL to use InnoDB is not that hard, but it still > > requires an additional step. Installing HSQLDB is a nobrainer and any > > JDBC book should give you enough info on how to use it. > > > > > (2) The application server. I think JBoss is moving away from the open > > source spirit, and in addition it is quite hard to customize > > (datasources etc). And you have to shell out money for the docs or buy a > > book. So if we forget about the open source aspect for a minute, it > > seems to me we are left with 2 options : Orion and JRun, both free for > > developers. It's been a while since I've worked with Orion, but have > > heard good things about it. I'm using JRun, and am quite pleased with it. > > > > I don't agree with you that JBoss is moving away from the open source > > spirit - they are just trying to capitalize on their hard work. The > > source is still available for JBoss. Even if they were, they are still > > more open than our other choices. > > > > I think we should select an app server based on the services/features > > that we require and the ease of configuring these services. I have some > > JBoss experience but almost no Orion experience so I am going by what I > > can quickkly learn from their documentation. > > > > Both JBoss and Orion are very easy to install -- unzip. > > > > Adding a Datasource seems to be much easier in Orion. The JBoss > > configuration seems much more complex. However, JBoss is based on JMX > > and if we could run a script that configures everything we need, then > > this would be less of an issue. > > > > Coming from a datbase beckground where you can do pretty much anything > > from SQL/DDL scripts, it has always surprised me that there has been > > little support by the app server vendors for scripted configuration of > > their servers. Having someone manually modifying configuration files on > > a production server seems very error prone to me. There is some new > > development in this area though. You can configure some WebLogic > > services using WLScript, and 8.1 is supposed to come with Ant tasks for > > configuring the MBeans. > > > > There is an open source project JMX4Ant > > (http://jmx4ant.sourceforge.net/) that does provide Ant tasks for JMX > > enabled app servers. It currently supports WebLogic and JBoss. I > > planning on trying this out next week and I will let you know if this > > would help us in the configuration area. It would be nice to have a few > > Ant targets for installing and configuring the required app server. > > > > > (3) The logo. We shouldn't mix metaphors, so if we go with the spring > > for the letter i, then we shouldn't use a cherry blossom or whatever > > for the cartoon. > > > > Agree, we should pick one or the other. > > > > Thomas > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > _______________________________________________ > > Springframework-developer mailing list > > Spr...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > > > > > > -- > Isabelle Muszynski > Software Engineer > Zandweellaan 4 > 2660 Antwerpen > Belgium > Tel. 32-(0)3-830 18 54 > Mobile: 32-(0)485 49 50 89 > Email: isa...@me... > Website: www.meta-logix.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > > |
|
From: Rod J. <rod...@in...> - 2003-04-27 21:36:44
|
> I just read parts of it and there is a default datasource for HSQLDB > already set up "java:/DefaultDS". Good point. I'd forgotten this. It also mentions that you can just > copy configuration files into the "deploy" directory and anything named > *-service.xml is hot deployed. That way we could just provide > configuration files and, using an Ant task, copy them to the deploy > directory. Yes, I've used this successfully. Each -service.xml file can contain any number of separate configurations, e.g. datasource + JMS destinations. I think it compares well to deployment on other servers. While I love Orion's startup speed (JBoss has been a bit slow since 3.0 beta) it's always seemed harder to automate deployment. The global XML files always seem to need new elements. However, I would still favour Orion of the two--I'd just like to hear if anyone has managed to use a "just copy these files" approach to Orion, as opposed to "copy these files and add these elements to this file". Rod |
|
From: Thomas R. <tri...@tr...> - 2003-04-28 02:57:24
|
Rod, > And when another publisher publishes a > book on JBoss (as with the recent Wrox book) the JBoss guys go onto The > ServerSide and their own forums and tell people not to buy that book. I felt > quite angry about that, as I know the author of the JBoss book. That angered me too, so I went to the bookstore a bought the book. A lot of their antics annoy me, but there are also other offenders out there. I guess it is part of a competitive landscape. I do wish they would separate the JBoss Group from JBoss the Open Source Project more clearly. Right now they share the website and it is hard to tell where the line is drawn. > I think the idea of making money through the docs is absurd, both as part of > a business model and on principle. There is some basic documentation avaliable for free - enough to get someone started. I don't have a problem paying a little for additional documentation. Thomas |
|
From: Rod J. <rod...@in...> - 2003-04-28 08:42:40
|
>I do wish they > would separate the JBoss Group from JBoss the Open Source Project more > clearly. Right now they share the website and it is hard to tell where > the line is drawn. Absolutely. Selling consultancy around a product, whether open source or commercial, is absolutely fine. But when there's no division between OSS development and a commercial operation there's always a risk that the open source offering will intentionally leave gaps for the consulting to fill. (Not that I think there's a problem with JBoss as a product.) |
|
From: Luke T. <ne...@fr...> - 2003-04-29 01:18:53
|
Rod Johnson wrote: >>I do wish they >>would separate the JBoss Group from JBoss the Open Source Project more >>clearly. Right now they share the website and it is hard to tell where >>the line is drawn. > > Absolutely. Selling consultancy around a product, whether open source or > commercial, is absolutely fine. But when there's no division between OSS > development and a commercial operation there's always a risk that the open > source offering will intentionally leave gaps for the consulting to fill. > (Not that I think there's a problem with JBoss as a product.) > As there have been endless discussions elsewhere, I don't think this should become a forum for expressing opinions on the ethics of the JBoss development approach. However as someone who done some work on JBoss and benefitted from working with/for the JBoss Group I feel I should put forward a few points in their defence and a few general comments on using the server. On documentation: Contrary to popular opinion there is not a conspiracy to deliberately provide inadequate documentation in order to force people to buy the pay-for version. It has always been seen as a pressing issue that the documentation was inadequate and I have been asked previously to help with updating it so I am probably as much to blame as anyone. There is the beginning of a rewrite languishing at http://www.monkeymachine.ltd.uk/JBossStart/JBossStart.html but it is little more than an intro to the server layout at present. Writing decent, accurate documentation is painstaking stuff and takes a lot of time and like most people I have other things to do and it tends to take a back seat. The introduction of pay-for docs was an attempt to solve this problem by giving an incentive to the developers to write and maintain documentation. There was a genuine realization that something as complicated as a J2EE server was going to require in-depth documentation and that's where Scott Stark's book comes in. It's meticulously detailed and the repeated editing cycles quickly stretch out into "a lengthy and stressful process" ((c) Rod Johnson :-); there's no way someone could realistically be expected to put in that much work for nothing. Most of us buy IT books - I don't see why the attitude to paying for books written by JBoss folk should be any different. (NB. I wasn't actually aware of the Wrox JBoss book or the serverside arguments until I read about them here, so not having read it I can't comment on that one way or the other). On violating the "Open Source Spirit": There is no way JBoss would be where it is today without the commitment of Marc Fleury and the other core developers who are working full or part-time for JBoss Group. It would just not be possible. They have done an extraordinary job in keeping it together. As with most projects there are voices raised everywhere complaining about one thing or another - I remember at one point the web site was being run from Marc's home and he was wrestling with the attention of script-kiddie hackers and being a newbie linux admin, as well as architecting the JBoss code and dealing with the all the corporate level issues as well. Such things are never perfect and it has often been very much a seat-of-the-pants thing. Bringing full time people on board (like Scott Stark) to manage the development and keep a grip on the codebase was an essential step if JBoss was to compete realistically with commercial servers. These guys have been hard at it for several years, mainly because it's what they want to do and they fight hard because they take a lot of flak from all sides - from the OS purists and from the commercial vendors who slag them off for giving away their work for free. They could all probably have made more money working for some investment bank or other - they certainly aren't taking the easy option. And the J2EE landscape is all the more interesting for it. The JBoss code is open source and always will be. Whatever the attractions of other commercial servers may be they are still black boxes and I've been badly burnt in the past by bugs in servers like JRun and Weblogic. With any J2EE server you will invariably become familiar with some of the internal server classnames - with commercial servers that will usually be through some stacktrace and that will be your lot. This can be immensely frustrating. With open source you always have the option of tracking things into the server code and that is often invaluable. To argue that JBoss isn't doing open source as some people would like it defined and therefore go with a completely closed source commercial option for the full J2EE server seems like strange logic to me. On the default Datasource: This is extremely useful when setting up a demo - all other servers that I am aware of require setting up an external database. I think someone mentioned that it was an old version of HSQL that is included but it is in fact an up to date one (1.7x). On the "multiple configuration files issue": This is something which has again caused a lot of complaints but once you start to see JBoss as a set of pluggable components, rather than a monolithic server with a single configuration file crammed with unrelated entries then it starts to make more sense. As someone has already pointed out, it is easier to supply an extra service configuration file along with your application and say "drop these into the deploy directory" than it is to ask users to edit particular sections of an existing configuration file. This approach can be used for adding datasources, JMS destinations or other services which are required for your application. This is one thing I *have* covered in the stalled "Intro to JBoss" docs mentioned above - please send any constructive feedback to lukeATmonkeymachine.ltd.uk :-). On server startup speed: having hot deployment of both services and applications makes this less of an issue, but you can always remove the services you don't need from the deploy directory and increase the startup speed substantially. Luke. -- Luke Taylor. Monkey Machine Ltd. PGP Key ID: 0x57E9523C http://www.monkeymachine.ltd.uk |
|
From: Thomas R. <tri...@tr...> - 2003-04-29 02:51:08
|
Luke Taylor wrote:
> I think someone mentioned that it was an old version
> of HSQL that is included but it is in fact an up to date one (1.7x).
>
Yes, you are right. The latest download includes HSQL 1.7.1.
> As someone has already pointed out, it is easier to
> supply an extra service configuration file along with your application
> and say "drop these into the deploy directory" than it is to ask users
> to edit particular sections of an existing configuration file. This
> approach can be used for adding datasources, JMS destinations or other
> services which are required for your application.
This is as I see it the biggest advantage of using JBoss for our demo
app. The following task is all you need in your Ant deployment target
<copy todir="${jboss.home}/server/${jboss.server}/deploy"
file="deploy/jboss/ticket-service.xml"/>
(I copied this from the build script that came with the Ticket sample
application from Rod's book.)
My vote is for JBoss/HSQL.
Thomas Risberg
|
|
From: William G. T. Jr. <wg...@rc...> - 2003-04-29 02:57:51
|
Thomas Risberg wrote:
> Luke Taylor wrote:
>
>
>>I think someone mentioned that it was an old version
>>of HSQL that is included but it is in fact an up to date one (1.7x).
>>
>
> Yes, you are right. The latest download includes HSQL 1.7.1.
>
>
>>As someone has already pointed out, it is easier to
>>supply an extra service configuration file along with your application
>>and say "drop these into the deploy directory" than it is to ask users
>>to edit particular sections of an existing configuration file. This
>>approach can be used for adding datasources, JMS destinations or other
>>services which are required for your application.
>
>
> This is as I see it the biggest advantage of using JBoss for our demo
> app. The following task is all you need in your Ant deployment target
>
> <copy todir="${jboss.home}/server/${jboss.server}/deploy"
> file="deploy/jboss/ticket-service.xml"/>
>
> (I copied this from the build script that came with the Ticket sample
> application from Rod's book.)
>
> My vote is for JBoss/HSQL.
>
> Thomas Risberg
>
+1 for JBoss/HSQL
Bill
|
|
From: John V. <jv...@ia...> - 2003-04-29 03:22:27
|
We already have MySQL and JBoss running here, as do most people I know. I'd love to see examples written with MySQL in mind because that means the road from example to code I can actually use is shorter. Retreating to lurkhood, John |
|
From: Kopylenko, D. <dko...@ac...> - 2003-04-29 12:14:14
|
JMX microkernel architecture rules!!!
+1 JBoss/HSQL
-----Original Message-----
From: William G. Thompson, Jr. [mailto:wg...@rc...]
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 22:57 PM
To: Thomas Risberg
Cc: spr...@li...
Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] database for demos
Thomas Risberg wrote:
> Luke Taylor wrote:
>
>
>>I think someone mentioned that it was an old version
>>of HSQL that is included but it is in fact an up to date one (1.7x).
>>
>
> Yes, you are right. The latest download includes HSQL 1.7.1.
>
>
>>As someone has already pointed out, it is easier to
>>supply an extra service configuration file along with your application
>>and say "drop these into the deploy directory" than it is to ask users
>>to edit particular sections of an existing configuration file. This
>>approach can be used for adding datasources, JMS destinations or other
>>services which are required for your application.
>
>
> This is as I see it the biggest advantage of using JBoss for our demo
> app. The following task is all you need in your Ant deployment target
>
> <copy todir="${jboss.home}/server/${jboss.server}/deploy"
> file="deploy/jboss/ticket-service.xml"/>
>
> (I copied this from the build script that came with the Ticket sample
> application from Rod's book.)
>
> My vote is for JBoss/HSQL.
>
> Thomas Risberg
>
+1 for JBoss/HSQL
Bill
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer
|
|
From: Rod J. <rod...@in...> - 2003-04-27 12:38:49
|
> First of all, I like the idea of the two trails. Covering application building and the main areas of functionality (that are usable on their own, mostly) separately makes sense. This demonstrates that Spring isn't a "do everything in our way or leave it" kind of framework, like so many so-called "application frameworks", but a very modular and non-intrusive effort. Good point. To me the fact that Spring is non-intrusive is one of its most important characteristics and best features. For example, application classes tend to expose JavaBean properties for Spring to configure rather than implement Spring APIs. And Spring is about layering: if you want our MVC, great, but if you don't you can use our bean factories with Struts or WebWork for example. |
