On Oct 18, 2006, at 8:37 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Oct 18, 2006, at 12:24 AM, David Jencks wrote:
On Oct 17, 2006, at 11:02 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Oct 10, 2006, at 8:28 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: Thanks Alan ... I figured that was the plan but thought I should ask than assume :)
Jencks is encouraging me to fix some of the TranQL problems in TCK so I'm updating my copy to 1.2. I simply can't wait to start running the TCK :-P
Great. I'm thinking that we can try to cut a real release by the end of this month and run it through the TCK wringer. What does everyone think?
I was thinking more in terms of getting the tck to pass and then cutting a release. Otherwise we run the risk of having months of work on 2 codebases to get the tck to pass. Experience has shown me that we can't apply fixes to 2 codebases very well.
Good point. Unfortunately the TCK licensing prevents us from providing an estimate on when this will happen. To me the main open question about 1.2 is whether we can certify on j2ee 1.4 with jee5 spec libraries. If so it is fairly simple to include jee5 preview features. If not we are going to have to jump through a lot of hoops to demonstrate any jee5 functionality. I haven't heard back from Geir with any news from sun on this question.
Can you explain your comment about "we are going to have to jump through a lot of hoops to demonstrate any jee5 functionality"? It sounds scary.
Yup, I'm worried. Lets take a simple example -- the tx manager. To do jpa according to spec, we need a jta 1.1 spec jar. It's possible to swap tx manager impls using the module/config aliasing, but I don't see a way to make this easy for users other than shipping 2 separate servers, one j2ee 1.4 w/no jee5 stuff and one uncertified jee5 server. Shipping twice as many servers would strain our resources as far as keeping track of so many zips.
thanks
|
