[jboss-dev-forums] [JBoss Transactions Development] - Re: Remoting Transport Transaction Inflow Design Discussion

[Mark Little]

Mark Little [http://community.jboss.org/people/marklittle] created the discussion

"Re: Remoting Transport Transaction Inflow Design Discussion"

To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/629336#629336

--------------------------------------------------------------
Understood, but TS is not a 3rd party project and we shouldn't be in a situation where it's even necessary to consider it as such.
> Jason Greene wrote:
> 
> > Mark Little wrote:
> > 
> > I suspect that the recent comments also gave credence to the fact that there was a push to get something, no matter what, into 6.0.
> Just to clarify my position is
> 
> 1. We need a decent stop-gap for EAP 6.0, whatever that may be
> 2. We need the real solution in EAP 6.1
> 
> The fork comment wasn't emotive, it was a practical reality. If the TX project was not going to do a 4 release that fixed the problem, then soemone else would have to. It's essentially the same way we handle a thirdparty project (e.g. apache) that does not share our schedule.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this message by going to Community
[http://community.jboss.org/message/629336#629336]

Start a new discussion in JBoss Transactions Development at Community
[http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&containerType=14&container=2041]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-dev-forums/attachments/20110929/1d4f4354/attachment.html