We all got confused...
The <data-source> is defined in the platform spec and schema, and
ejb-jar_3_1.xsd (and all others) include all of it:
<xsd:include schemaLocation="javaee_6.xsd"/>
If we want to mention @DataSourceDefinition annotation, please suggest
the location.
thanks,
-marina
Marina Vatkina wrote:
> Thank you Reza.
>
> Yes, please file the issues, so that we have a common list of items to
> look at. The actual issues with the spec (as in the data-source you
> mention as compared to the wish list as the interop) should be marked
> as a bug or a task depending on the context.
>
> thanks,
> -marina
>
> Reza Rahman wrote:
>> 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 the outdated stuff removed.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
>>>
>>>
>>