1 2 Previous Next 20 Replies Latest reply on Mar 14, 2008 11:31 AM by adrian.brock Go to original post
      • 15. Re: JBDEPLOY-3 issues

         

        "alesj" wrote:

        A fair warning: all AS5 deployers that define type should get that removed from xml, since setType is not longer there ;-)


        Fair warning is a message to the dev-list with a title that has block capitals
        and an explanation of what people need to do to get the correct behaviour.

        In this case, the change to managed object should have gone into jbossas first
        before we removed this from the deployers.

        • 16. Re: JBDEPLOY-3 issues
          alesj

           

          "adrian@jboss.org" wrote:
          That is unless you want to go through all the deployers that exist
          to get jboss-head to compile/boot. :-)

          Hehe, thought this might come up.
          That's why I didn't want to remove type on the deployers in the first place. :-)

          OK, will do that.

          btw: What's the mechanism?
          I'll just put 'Managed* api' for now.

          • 17. Re: JBDEPLOY-3 issues

             

            "alesj" wrote:

            btw: What's the mechanism?
            I'll just put 'Managed* api' for now.


            For now, just leave the type mechanism in the code, but deprecate it
            and get scott to update the warning once he has done the work in the profile service
            to make it work. We can then remove the code but NOT the method signature
            until we know everybody has made the switch.

            log.warn("Types should be set using <Scott to provide mechansim/> for " + this);
            


            :-)

            • 18. Re: JBDEPLOY-3 issues

              By the way, this is holding me up.

              I built a snapshot last night that included
              some of these changes and now I can't get JBossAS to build

              So if you can revert it asap that would be nice. ;-)

              • 19. Re: JBDEPLOY-3 issues
                alesj

                 

                "adrian@jboss.org" wrote:

                So if you can revert it asap that would be nice. ;-)

                Done --> Reverting back to 70804, one commit before type removal.

                • 20. Re: JBDEPLOY-3 issues

                  I don't know what you reverted but it was very incomplete,
                  don't worry about I'll fix it.

                  P.S. The stuff that Scott actually uses looks very broken to me anyway.
                  There is an AbstractDeployment::types field which isn't included in the serialization
                  contract????? :-)

                  1 2 Previous Next