Bug 1043339

Summary: Show warning for JDBC drivers as modules with no driver
Product: [JBoss] JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 Reporter: James Livingston <jlivings>
Component: JCAAssignee: James Livingston <jlivings>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Martin Simka <msimka>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact: Russell Dickenson <rdickens>
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 6.2.0CC: joallen, tom.jenkinson
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-02-03 03:54:39 UTC Type: Enhancement
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description James Livingston 2013-12-16 03:21:20 UTC 
If a <driver> if configured with no <driver-class>, it will attempt to locate the driver(s) via the service loader which should find all JDBC4-compliant drivers.

When you install a non JDBC4-complicant driver as a module and no <driver-class>, the driver will not be installed. That is expected but emitting a warning that no-drivers could be found in the module would be useful to help users troubleshoot the problem.
Comment 1 JBoss JIRA Server 2014-03-18 00:37:42 UTC 
Jeff Zhang <jizhang> updated the status of jira WFLY-2655 to Resolved
Comment 2 James Livingston 2014-03-21 00:59:12 UTC 
Should be easy to backport https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/commit/fdb6afe7b93ec6fff0ee599e7309d8b682272b18
Comment 4 James Livingston 2014-03-31 05:34:33 UTC 
https://github.com/doctau/jboss-eap/tree/bz1043339 now includes renumbering which has been done upstream. I'm checking with Stefano that it's fine to change in EAP too.
Comment 5 tom.jenkinson 2014-09-03 09:34:54 UTC 
Hi,

I am checking the status of this, is the work still required or can the bug be closed?

Tom
Comment 6 James Livingston 2014-10-27 23:43:44 UTC 
I'm fine if we NACK this for 6.4, although useful in some circumstance there's not a big demand for it.
Comment 7 James Livingston 2016-02-03 03:54:39 UTC 
Since this didn't get in to 6.4, and it's an enhancement it's unlikely to be done in a CP, so I'm closing it WONTFIX.