November 2006 - jboss-user - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam 1.1.0 build failed

by wschwendt

For the time being, a simple workaoround is to remove "jargen" from target "build" in file build.xml. |  | |  | <target name="build" depends="jar,jarui,jardebug" description="Build all four distribution .jar files"/> | | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987605#3987605 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987605

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam 1.1.0 build failed

by wschwendt

"gavin.king(a)jboss.com" wrote : Ack, I missed adding one of the src folders to the dist. I'll fix and upload a new build. Thanks for the reply, Gavin. For the time being, a simple workaoround is to remove "jargen" from target "build" in file build.xml.   Then it is possible to build jboss-seam.jar, jboss-seam-debug.jar and jboss-seam-ui.jar without any build failure. But since I'm new to JBoss seam, I was wondering whether the build.xml file for seam1.1 is really intended as it was released. This is why I asked here. Clearly, for new users it can be confusing when they download the distribution and encounter a build failure. PS: Sorry for my bad English View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987603#3987603 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987603

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam-gen and eclipse WTP functionality removed?

by gavin.king＠jboss.com

James feeling was that WTP was currently too flakey to really be able to support at this time. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987602#3987602 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987602

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[EJB 3.0] - Re: Entity bean cascade design issue

by weston.price＠jboss.com

And removing the Employee for the Order, what happens to it then? How does it get recorded as a transaction? I would assume some form of reconciliation has to take place on the Order at some point. If the Employee/Order relationship is part of that reconciliation things are going to get skewed without that association as well. If the Employee/Order relationship is not required for the business, then leaving the dangling ID might be acceptable. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987601#3987601 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987601

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Beginners Corner] - Re: Which jar-file contains support for Schedulable

by danj

"PeterJ" wrote : Looks like those classes are in the following files, all found in server/default/lib: | ... | scheduler-plugin.jar | Thanks: this one suffieced! /Dan View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987600#3987600 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987600

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss jBPM] - Task Management

by hriver

We are evaluating jBPM for the purpose of replacing the custom work flow components of our operational support systems. We have two systems which have been in production for roughly five years and a couple of other systems with work flow requirements on the horizon. We have run into difficultly with the way task instances are managed within jBPM and were hoping to get some feedback. To start with, we view a task list as representing the tasks which can be performed on a particular process instance in it's current state. So if a user were to bring up an order (process instance), the task list would show the tasks which could be performed on the order at that time. We were hoping to back the task list with jBPM task instances. Hopefully there is nothing too unreasonable here. One problem we run into is with with an optional task - a task which is valid (but not required) in one particular node, but is not valid in any other node. The task list needs to contain the task while we are in node B, but once we move to node C it should be removed. If we simple define the task on node B it will remain open until it is completed, even if we transition to node C (where it is no longer valid) or even if the process instance completes (when it certainly is not valid). If the task is valid and optional in multiple nodes we have another problem in that now multiple instances of the same task may exist as open. Is there any mechanism for supporting this type of scenario within a process definition? Should we not even attempt to represent these types of tasks on the process definition? Is it reasonable to modify the task instance management to remove any incomplete task instances on leaving a task node? Another probelm area is with tasks which can be performed multiple times. If we call end() on the task instance when it is completed the instance will no longer be open and we will need to create another instance to get it into the task list. If we do not call end() we lose the event notification and history. Any suggestions? We would also like to give the process designer greater ability to specify when a transition should be taken, especially based on the completion of a particular task. Given the task node signal property and a decision node there is some support for this, but it does not seem to be sufficent when dealing with multiple transitions or tasks (this particluar problem seems to somewhat covered in the Two Transfer Definitions thread). "It would be nice" to simple specificy on a task that a particular transition should be taken when it's complete. For more complex scenarios something along the lines of a customer node implementation which uses a DecisionHandler might be a better solution. Any suggestions? We would appreciate any help you can offer. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987599#3987599 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987599

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam 1.1.0 build failed

by gavin.king＠jboss.com

Ack, I missed adding one of the src folders to the dist. I'll fix and upload a new build. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987598#3987598 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987598

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Eclipse IDE (users)] - Re: Problem regarding downloading and installing JBoss IDE 2

by BogusException

dlibke, Thanks for pointing me to the right URL. It worked great! BogusException View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987597#3987597 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987597

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Eclipse IDE (users)] - Re: Problem regarding downloading and installing JBoss IDE 2

by BogusException

Ashish, Thanks for the reply. I wondered about the copy/paste! I got the JBoss IDE 2.0.0 plugin working (just needed the right URL) with the latest Eclipse, but ran into a more serious barrier. I have an application that I wrote in J2SE 5 that can't be done in 1.4. I now am learning to use J2EE 5 so I can migrate. Apparently, while Eclipse and the JBoss IDE work with J2EE 5, the JBoss server itself won't (yet). I started getting all kinds of errors, and after searching found that Sun (no surprise) was the only one at 100% support (with NetBeans 5.5, App Svr 9, tools bundle, etc.). So now I think I'm forced to switch gears and not develop on JBoss (which I wanted to), and learn NetBeans and go the Sun way. I think my logic is that if I get good enough at J2EE in Sun's products, I'll be able to migrate to JBoss when it supports J2EE 5. Does that sound right? TIA! BogusException View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987596#3987596 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987596

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[EJB 3.0] - Re: Entity bean cascade design issue

by alexg79

anonymous wrote : You would usually assume the Order would have to be tied to some existing employee and that employee would have to exist. Semantically I don't think it makes a lot of sense to have an Order without a customer which pretty much dictates #1, at least for this particular situation. Uh...if the order has already been processed, and you reassign it to someone else, that person's sales record would be skewed. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987594#3987594 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987594

19 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-user November 2006