Marina Vatkina wrote:
> Thank you Jean-Louis.
>
> Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I mainly focused on changes (red change bars).
>> 4.3.14 Transaction Context of Session Bean Methods
>> --> the first sentence is very long and too difficult to understand.
>> Is it possible to rephrase it or to split it?
How about this:
The following session bean's methods are invoked in the scope of a
transaction determined by the transaction attribute specified in the
bean’s metadata annotations or deployment descriptor:
* an implementation of a method defined in a session bean’s business
interface or component interface or no-interface view
* a web service method
* a timeout callback method
* a singleton or a stateful session bean’s PostConstruct or
PreDestroy lifecycle callback interceptor method
* a stateful session bean’s PrePassivate and PostActivate lifecycle
callback interceptor method
thanks,
-marina
>>
>> From 4.3.4, I can read life-cycle methods (PostConstruct for
>> instance) of SLSB always execute in an unspecified transaction
>> context. Only Singleton and Stateful support transaction attributes
>> (8.6.5 Unspecified transaction is also mentioned for SLSB)
>> Whereas from 4.3.14, it suggests it's possible.
>
> I'll look into it and send the new text for review.
>>
>> Am I wrong?
>>
>> 7.1 There is a type iterceptors --> interceptors
>
> thanks.
>>
>> BTW, there is a typo p23: Davd should be David ;-)
>
> Thanks! It's actually a copy-and-paste error :( (David, can you ask
> jcp people to fix your name in the EG list?).
>>
>> Hope it helps
>
> Of course. Thanks again,
> -marina
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>> 2012/1/11 Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com
>> <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>>
>>
>> Hi Antonio,
>>
>>
>> Antonio Goncalves wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here are a few comments/questions (mostly about Interceptor
>> and Transaction specification) :
>>
>> * Will interceptors still be inside the EJB spec or will there
>> be a seperate spec ? It feels like JPA 1.0 when it was bundled
>> with EJBs. Now that interceptors can be applied to managed
>> beans, couldn't it be move to the Java EE spec instead of the
>> EJB (like the Managed Bean and Transaction support)?
>>
>>
>> There is a note (still marked XXX to be filled in if there is an
>> update to the Interceptors spec) under 1.5:
>>
>> "The Interceptors document defines the contracts and requirements
>> for the use and implementation of interceptors. These contracts,
>> while required by the core EJB specification, are described in a
>> way that is independent of EJB in order to faciliate their use by
>> other enterprise Java technologies. Future revisions to the
>> Interceptors specification[38] will be undertaken independently of
>> EJB [XXX To be confirmed]."
>>
>> Should I remove the text in []?
>>
>>
>> * Chapter 6 (Persistence) is blank and just refers to the JPA
>> specification. Why don't we do the same for interceptors and
>> support for transaction ? They could be left "blank" and just
>> refer the seperate interceptor and transaction spec.
>>
>>
>> Transactions chapter will probably stay as the new annotations
>> will be different, with the ref to the JTA spec, and may be some
>> generic text replaced with the pointers to that spec. But the
>> interceptors chapter might be a good idea as you are not the first
>> one looking for the clarity in this area.
>>
>> What do others think?
>>
>> thanks,
>> -marina
>>
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 21:54, Marina Vatkina
>> <marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>
>> <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com
>> <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>>> wrote:
>>
>> Happy New Year everybody!
>>
>> This is a friendly reminder that I'm still waiting for the
>> reviews.
>>
>> Best,
>> -marina
>>
>>
>> Marina Vatkina wrote:
>>
>> Experts,
>>
>> I uploaded EDR versions of both books of the EJB 3.2
>> spec.
>> Please review the changes before the books go to the
>> JCP site
>> for an official submission. If you don't have any
>> comments,
>> please let me know if you are ok with the EDR in its
>> current
>> state.
>>
>> The books have the change bars (the Optional Chapters
>> changes
>> are very minor) and all the changes are listed in the
>> Revision
>> History sections.
>>
>> Other than all the cleanups and clarifications (thank
>> you very
>> much to everybody who helped with this activity), the
>> following had been added to/changed in the spec (the
>> corresponding parts of the revision history are
>> prepended with
>> *New:*) :
>>
>> * Added asynchronous session bean invocations and
>> non-persistent EJB Timer Service support to EJB 3.2 Lite.
>> * Removed restriction to obtain the current class loader;
>> changed ‘must not’ to ‘should exercises caution’ when
>> using
>> the Java I/O package.
>> * Added support for the lifecycle callback interceptor
>> methods
>> of stateful session beans to execute in a transaction
>> context
>> determined by the bean’s transaction management type
>> and any
>> applicable transaction attribute.
>>
>> Have a nice reading!
>>
>> -marina
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Antonio Goncalves
>> Software architect and Java Champion
>>
>> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter
>> <http://twitter.com/agoncal> | Blog
>> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/AntonioGoncalves> | LinkedIn
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG
>> <http://www.parisjug.org>
>>
>>