Agreed here as well :-)
On 30 Jun 2011, at 15:48, Reza Rahman wrote:
> I agree.
>
> On 6/30/2011 5:36 AM, Stefan Heldt wrote:
>> Ok, hopefully java.net is up now.
>>
>> And of course: I would vote for a) and marking all other EJB 2.1 things as proposed OPTIONAL in 3.2.
>>
>> Stefan!
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Marina Vatkina [mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com]
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Juni 2011 23:42
>> An: Stefan Heldt
>> Betreff: Re: AW: [jsr345-experts] Re: Working draft documents are available for review
>>
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> As proposed optional :).
>>
>> You might need to resend your reply, if it is not delivered to the aliases when java.net is back up.
>>
>> thanks,
>> -marina
>>
>> Stefan Heldt wrote:
>>> I would vote for a) and marking all other EJB 2.1 things as proposed final in 3.2.
>>>
>>> Stefan!
>>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Marina Vatkina [mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com]
>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. Juni 2011 02:34
>>> An: jsr345-experts_at_ejb-spec.java.net
>>> Betreff: [jsr345-experts] Re: Working draft documents are available
>>> for review
>>>
>>> We have 2 choices:
>>>
>>> a) make optional in this release features that were defined as
>>> proposed optional in 3.1;
>>> b) make them optional in the next release (or later) when we have more features that reach this option.
>>>
>>> What would be your preference?
>>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3734 - Release Date: 06/29/11
>>
>>
>>
>