@Jean-Louis:

A gentle reminder - You should not be pulling hairs out... men have
issues with alopecia sooner or later anyway ;)

@All:

Hope you and your family are well and the upcoming year 2010 looks
bright to you :)

All the best!

Daniel

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> David wrote some posts a week ago related to the new EJB 3.1 specification.
>
> I'd like to know if there is a plan to go to EJB 3.1?
> I mean, do we have a clear view of the gap between our implementation and
> where we need/want to go?
> I know that we already have a set of features implemented (at least
> partially).
>
> I guess if we'll need to release a major version if we add EJB 3.1 features.
>
> What about all open issues?
> IMHO, it would be nice to have a look to our JIRA and close not relevant
> issues. Some of them has been fixed, some other have some patch file to
> check and validate, etc ...
> I gonna try to get some easy to fix issues and try to close them.
> Some others are probably too hard for me;-)
> That done, may be we should release the 3.1.3?
>
> Finally, Jacek did some tests and went ahead with OSGI.
> I spent a couple of time pulling some hair out. After some small tests with
> Karaf, i believe we can make it work in an OSGI environment.
> But, i spoke some month ago with Guillaume NODET and another guy from
> servicemix and if we want to make OpenEJB OSGI ready, it seems we will need
> to refactor some pieces of code. Anyway, i'm convince Jacek have a far
> better overview.
>
> I just wanted to point it out in order to check if we can manage OSGI with
> EJB 3.1 tasks.
>
> It's definitely another topic we can discussed by the end of January with a
> beer (and may be more ...) ;-)
>
> Men, Happy New Year!!!
> I wish you (and your family) all the best.
>
> Kind regards,
> Jean-Louis
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://n4.nabble.com/EJB-3-1-is-out-brainstorming-session-tp991512p991512.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Reply via email to