Marina Vatkina wrote:
> Carlo de Wolf wrote:
>> On 06/27/2012 01:29 AM, Marina Vatkina wrote:
>>> Experts,
>>>
>>> The current list of possible method-intf types include the following:
>>>
>>> <xsd:complexType name="method-intfType">
>>> ...
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="Home"/>
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="Remote"/>
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="LocalHome"/>
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="Local"/>
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="ServiceEndpoint"/>
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="Timer"/>
>>> <xsd:enumeration value="MessageEndpoint"/>
>>>
>>> Which clearly misses an option to use it for the transaction
>>> settings of the lifecycle callback methods on a singleton or a
>>> stateful session bean class.
>>>
>>> To make it clear that the new type applies to the methods of the
>>> bean class, not the Interceptor class, let's call it
>>> "LifecycleCallback", and indeed add it to the xsd schema.
>>
>> I presume you mean it applies to the whole callback regardless of
>> whether it involves methods defined in an interceptor class or the
>> bean class?
>
> No, I mean it only applies to the methods on the bean class itself.
> The spec allows to set tx attribute only on those methods.
>
>> Reading it as such I could interpret it as an interceptor lifecycle
>> callback having an unspecified tx context.
>
> We hadn't change that.
To be more specific, if this to be changed, it needs to be changed in
the interceptor spec. Though there are some plans to may be have an MR
for that spec, they are not clear yet...
-marina
>
> -marina
>>
>> Carlo
>>
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you think otherwise.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> -marina
>>>
>>> Marina Vatkina wrote:
>>>> Experts,
>>>>
>>>> Please let me and Jeremy know if you agree that such shortcuts in
>>>> the ejb-jar.xml deployment descriptor are useful to be added.
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> -marina
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: [ejb-spec issues] [JIRA] Commented: (EJB_SPEC-49) Add
>>>> new method-intf type to deployment descriptor for transactional
>>>> lifecycle interceptors
>>>> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:56:20 +0000 (GMT+00:00)
>>>> From: jrbauer (JIRA) <jira-no-reply_at_java.net>
>>>> Reply-To: issues_at_ejb-spec.java.net
>>>> To: issues_at_ejb-spec.java.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [
>>>> http://java.net/jira/browse/EJB_SPEC-49?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=339606#action_339606
>>>> ]
>>>> jrbauer commented on EJB_SPEC-49:
>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> To further clarify -
>>>>
>>>> In particular, the new method-intf type would be useful with
>>>> wild-carding since it let's you scope to a specific interface
>>>> type. For example, to set NotSupported for the lifecycle methods
>>>> without affecting other interfaces:
>>>>
>>>> <container-transaction>
>>>> <method>
>>>> <ejb-name>MySession</ejb-name>
>>>> <method-intf>LifecycleInterceptor</method-intf>
>>>> <method-name>*</method-name>
>>>> </method>
>>>> <trans-attribute>NotSupported</trans-attribute>
>>>> </container-transaction>
>>>>
>>>>> Add new method-intf type to deployment descriptor for
>>>>> transactional lifecycle interceptors
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Key: EJB_SPEC-49
>>>>> URL: http://java.net/jira/browse/EJB_SPEC-49
>>>>> Project: ejb-spec
>>>>> Issue Type: Improvement
>>>>> Affects Versions: 3.2
>>>>> Reporter: jrbauer
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that lifecycle callbacks of singleton and stateful bean
>>>>> interceptors can now run within container managed transactions, I
>>>>> think we need to add a new method-intf type to the possible values
>>>>> of the container-transaction->method definition in the DD. The
>>>>> current values do not provide the ability to specifically target
>>>>> transaction attributes to this style of interceptor via the DD.
>>>>> The name "LifecycleInterceptor" seems a good fit. Thoughts?
>>>>> I've seen at least one location in Javadoc that provides the list
>>>>> of possible meta-inf values, so at least one, maybe more, updates
>>>>> would be needed there as well.
>>>>
>>