Experts,
The document on the spec download page named " EJB API Groups
Definitions and Rules with Embeddable Container
<
http://java.net/projects/ejb-spec/downloads/download/p416-435.pdf>"
contains the updated version of the 16.1 section up-to the updated
section 18.3.1 in the Embeddable Container to make sure no one expects
it to support .war files by default.
Unfortunately the FrameMaker didn't allow me to pick and choose the
pages to save as a pdf file. So the pages that you need to pay attention
to are 2-4 (417-419) and the last one (435).
If you have any concerns, please say so ASAP.
thanks,
-marina
<
http://java.net/projects/ejb-spec/downloads/download/p416-435.pdf>
On 3/4/13 5:46 PM, Marina Vatkina 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
>
>
>
>