Grouper Developers Forum

[Kathryn Huxtable <>]

I would assume as much. There aren't any visible changes in the API. It's on
our list to do, but Signet is complicated and it's not clear what we'll use
it for. Grouper is very clear, though the UI is a bit clunky.

-K


On 8/1/06 9:33 PM, "Tom Barton" 
<>
 wrote:

> You can replace the subject-0.1 with subject-0.2.1 in signet 1.0.1
> without problems. I have - works great.
> 
> Tom
> 
> Kathryn Huxtable wrote:
>> Well, signet should definitely be using subject 0.2.1, don't you think? The
>> JNDI support and the customizable SQL are big improvements.
>> 
>> -K
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/1/06 7:26 PM, "Tom Barton" 
>> <>
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> blair christensen. wrote:
>>>> subject              0.2.1
>>> I think signet ships with subject v0.1. Also, in comparing lib versions
>>> with subjects, I note below a few discrepancies from what you'd reported.
>>> 
>>> Dave Donnelly wrote:
>>>> One more comment- The "Subject" project should also be considered
>>>> when creating/maintaining i2mi-common.
>>> Hmm. Subject has its own 3rd party lib dependencies. Perhaps it too
>>> should rely on i2mi-common and not be embedded within it?
>>> 
>>> While I'm at it, adding subject v0.2.1 to blair's tables yields
>>> 
>>>                       Grouper1.0    Subject0.2.1    Signet1.0.1
>>> commons-beanutils    1.6           1.6
>>> commons-collections  3.1           3.1             2.1.1
>>> commons-dbcp         1.2.1         1.2.1           1.2.1
>>> commons-digester     1.6           1.6
>>> commons-logging      1.0.4         1.0.4           1.0.4
>>> commons-pool         1.2           1.2             1.2
>>> hibernate            2.1.8         2.??[1]         2.1.8
>>> jconn2                             5.5
>>> junit                3.8.1         3.8.1           3.8.1
>>> log4j                1.2.8         1.2.8           1.2.8
>>> 
>>> [1] - the version, whatever it is, is some 2.X earlier than 2.1.8.
>>> 
>>> Tom
>>