users@connector-spec.java.net

[connector-spec-users] [jsr322-experts] Re: Connector CF Resource Definition annotation - a proposal and request for comments.

From: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen_at_redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 03:47:24 -0500

On 12/13/2012 06:54 AM, Sivakumar Thyagarajan wrote:
> Could you please share your comments and inputs on this?
>

Other changes to the Platform spec:

1) Ok, to add the interface name

2) Yes, application clients should be excluded

3) Same as 2) - application clients should be excluded


Open questions:

1) I would suggest

  @ResourceAdapterActivation / @ResourceAdapterDeployment
  @ResourceAdapterDefinition
  @ConnectionFactoryDefinitions
  @ConnectionFactoryDefinition
  @AdministeredObjectDefinitions
  @AdministeredObjectDefinition

With a package name of javax.annotation.resource

We should also aim at having annotations for "sub-areas" of the
activation - like @Pool

2) I'm ok with using '#' as the separator. However, we should use the
full names of the modules, e.g.

  <module-name>a.ear#r.rar</module-name>

in order to allow for vendor specific deployment formats.

3) Ok, and the same for the resource adapter and admin objects

4) We can do min-pool-size / max-pool-size (scoped under pool). Other
standard properties should be made in a future revision of the specification

5) Deployments to component namespaces (java:global, ...) should be
excluded in this revision.

6)
    i) Component namespaces are excluded for deployment in general
   ii) Ok, and the same for the activation in general
  iii) Ok, and the same for the activation in general


General comment:

We need to exclude component namespaces in this revision such that we
aren't restricted once we start to work on standardizing JNDI locations
and component namespaces. Once these policies are in place we can update
the policies for the annotations based on the outcome.

Best regards,
  Jesper