Seema,
That appears to be a mistake, but I would not fix it as it is not going
to be used much. Since you have already fixed it for the latest API set,
that's more than sufficient.
Thanks,
Sahoo
Seema Richard wrote:
>
> Sahoo,
>
> For web_app_2.5 and web_app_2.5, I have included <api_ref
> api_name_version="EJB_Client_3.0"/>
>
> However, for web app 2.3, the mapping is
> <api name_version="web_app_2.3">
> <api_ref api_name_version="J2EE_1.3"/>
> </api>
>
> So I will have to add a separate list of technologies in this case.
> Why is the mapping given directly to J2EE only for web_app_2.3 and
> web_app_2.2?
>
> Thanks,
> Seema
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sahoo [mailto:sahoo_at_sun.com]
> Sent: Mon 5/26/2008 8:34 PM
> To: dev_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> Subject: Re: [@V] Question on Bug 3625 on Verifier
>
> Seema,
>
> Good finding. Looks like we need to introduce a notion of client APIs,
> e.g. EJB_Client_3.0 and instead of adding EJB_3.0 to web_app_2.5, we
> need to add EJB_Client_3.0. What do you think?
>
> I have now confirmed the issue.
>
> Thanks,
> Sahoo
>
> Seema Richard wrote:
> >
> > Sahoo,
> >
> > I had a query regarding the bug about detecting non-standard
> > annotations in code. This is the example that you provided for the bug.
> >
> > @WebService
> >
> > public class MyServletEndpoint {
> >
> > @javax.ejb.TransactionAttribute(REQUIRES_NEW) // incorrect use
> >
> > public void registerUser(String username, String encodedPW) {
> >
> > // ...
> >
> > }
> >
> > }
> >
> > However, since a servlet is allowed to access EJB client API, classes
> > in javax.ejb package are in the classpath for a web module. Hence they
> > would not be considered as non-standard annotations. Please comment on
> > this. Also, please change the status of the bug from 'Unconfirmed' to
> > 'New'.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Seema
> >
>
>