Hi Reza,
I'm not sure about the pruning of CORBA. We are using CORBA in some projects to access EJBs directly from C / C++. It works really great.
CORBA seems to be also very popular in embedded space.
+1 for making @DataSourceDefinition more usable,
--adam
On 30.06.2011, at 20:01, 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 Generally, it obviously makes things a lot less cluttered with all the outdated stuff removed.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
>>
>>
>
Independent Consultant, Speaker, Java Champion
Weblog: blog.adam-bien.com
press: press.adam-bien.com
eMail: abien_at_adam-bien.com
twitter: twitter.com/AdamBien
Mobile: 0049(0)170 280 3144
Author of:
"Real World Java EE Night Hacks", "Real World Java EE Patterns--Rethinking Best Practices"