Yes, You are right, "migration " is not the right word. Maybe "temporary migration during testing and development of existing beans" ;)
On 9/24/07, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 6:14 PM, Karan Malhi wrote: > > >> If they > >> are specifying the JNDI names for all their beans in some vendor > >> deployment descriptors they shouldn't have to do all that work again > >> in our descriptors, we should just support at least that part of > >> their vendor's descriptors. If they aren't supplying the names in > >> descriptors and are relying upon some vendor default, we can > >> implement the same default. > > Good idea. Maybe some migration paths from, for example Websphere 5.1 > > and 6 ? Hope I understood correctly when you said "support a vendors > > descriptor". > > Not really "migration" as you're not leaving your vendor (unless you > want to), but simply adding us into the mix likely for testing > reasons cause your vendor is too bulky for simple unit tests. > > Like if you're using GlassFish for final deployment but want to use > us for embedded testing your ejbs in your build, we should be able to > use their JNDI name format -- whatever it is. > > -David > > > > -- Karan Singh Malhi
