Antonio, Experts,
Unless any of you objects, I'll add the following to the table
1. In the EJB Lite group content:
PACKAGING:
Session beans packaged in a .war file
2. Under rules in 16.1.1
* To use an application packaged in an ear file, packaging applications
in an ear file must be supported.
thanks,
-marina
On 3/4/13 11:28 PM, Marina Vatkina wrote:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> On 3/4/13 10:55 PM, Antonio Goncalves wrote:
>> Hi Marina,
>>
>> There is nothing about JAX-RS endpoints in table 19.
>
> So far JAX-RS support was not a responsibility of the EJB Container,
> so I feel that adding it to the table will add it as a requirement.
> But if others think its useful, I can add JAX-RS under the EJB Lite
> services.
>
>> I know it's not the appropriate chapter of the spec but shouldn't
>> packaging be mentioned ?
>
> The packaging requirements should be described in the platform
> documents - are they not?
>
>> At least point to a different paragraph. Packaging an EJB Lite (war)
>> or Full (jar/ear) is a bit confusing at the moment (e.g. you can
>> package MDBs in a war file under JBoss, couldn't make it work on
>> GlassFish 3 at the time).
>
> You should be able to package an MDB into a war file. If GF doesn't
> support it, it's a bug.
>
> thanks,
> -marina
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Marina Vatkina
>> <marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Experts,
>>
>> I've written the rules for adding support for EJB features in
>> addition to the EJB Lite, i.e. to allow EJB containers some
>> flexibility in-between EJB Lite and EJB Full requirements. Those
>> of you who were asking for it, please do your part and review it
>> asap.
>>
>> The proposed changes are in the section 16.1 "EJB Lite" and the
>> corresponding part of the spec is available in the project
>> download area under the title " EJB API Groups Definitions and
>> Rules
>> <http://java.net/projects/ejb-spec/downloads/download/p416-418.pdf>".
>>
>> The changes span only 3 pages, with the changes on the 1st page
>> are to remove "3.2" version from the text. I.e. it shouldn't take
>> long to review them ;)
>>
>> The major changes are on the pages 2 and 3 (417 and 418). They
>> include replacing the table 19 “Required contents of EJB Lite and
>> Full EJB API” with a new table (also #19) called “EJB API
>> Groups”. These are the groups of features that can be supported
>> only as a whole group, and EJB Lite being just one of them. The
>> section 16.1.1, “Support for Other EJB API Groups in an EJB Lite
>> Container” defines additional rules.
>>
>> One side effect of this change is to remove fine-grained options
>> for the BMP/CMP support defined in Chapter 2 of the optional
>> document (i.e. BMP/CMP should be supported all or none).
>>
>> Unless I hear otherwise in the next day or so (the PFD submission
>> date is this week), I'll include the proposed changes into the
>> spec and adjust the optional doc accordingly.
>>
>> Best,
>> -marina
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Antonio Goncalves
>> Software architect and Java Champion
>>
>> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter
>> <http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG
>> <http://www.parisjug.org> | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr>
>