Marina,
Good work (I am sure it was not particularly easy). I didn't read
everything word-for-word, but it looks OK. If I see anything at a later
point in time, I will let you know.
Generally, it obviously makes things a lot less cluttered with all the
outdated stuff removed. I only regret that I did not push harder to make
all the EJB 2.x stuff pruned in EJB 3.1. Maybe we can fix that this
time. I don't know how others feel, but I would also like to prune the
CORBA interoperability. All this stuff was fine in the late 90s/early
2000s. It's just an eyesore in 2011/2012 and a reminder of why so many
people still dread EJB despite all of our efforts to make it a truly
lightweight technology.
A couple of other things that caught my eye while reading this:
* Anyone remember why just session beans and not message driven beans
also are not defined to be managed beans? Should that be fixed?
* I think the schema is missing the <data-source> element (corresponding
to the @DataSourceDefinition annotation). I believe application.xml,
ejb-jar.xml and web.xml were all supposed to support that. In fact,
should we make some mention of the @DataSourceDefinition annotation?
If you need me to enter JIRAs for these, let me know.
Cheers,
Reza
On 6/17/2011 7:35 PM, Marina Vatkina wrote:
> Yes, you now have 2 (you did ask for a split, didn't you? ;))
> documents that constitute the EJB 3.2 draft.
>
> They are uploaded for the review at
> http://java.net/projects/ejb-spec/downloads, and called the Core
> Requirements, and the Optional Features. The latter includes all of
> the formerly proposed optional features (i.e. support for EJB 2.1 and
> earlier Entity Beans and JAX-RPC based Web Service Endpoints), and the
> former has the rest with just a handful of references to the latter.
>
> I did my best with the split. Some things were easy (CMP/BMP
> chapters), some were not. E.g., I left deployment descriptors schema
> in the Core doc as it wasn't clear how and if it is possible to split
> it, but the details that are specific to the optional features are
> described in the Optional doc. I changed some code examples that were
> referencing an Entity Bean to be using a second Session bean. You'll
> see more...
>
> I do need help modifying Ch8 Support for Transactions. I ran out of
> ideas of how to avoid referencing there the Entity Beans (see the
> "diamond" diagram and the corresponding text). May be if/when we
> refactor transaction support into a common Java EE document (the name
> TBD), it will be fixed there without mentioning the EJBs altogether.
>
> In addition to the actual split, the documents include questions for
> the reviewers marked with XXX - Linda did a careful pass through the
> text (before I split it) and reworded some of the statements where it
> was needed or would benefit from rewording. XXX markers are items that
> need further clarifications.
>
> Please carefully review both documents.
>
> Have a nice reading,
> -marina
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1513/3710 - Release Date: 06/17/11
>
>