Hah, yes definitely. Completely confusing historical artifact ;) txs 4 the catch, could you change this please?
LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Eric Covener <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 1:56 PM > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:22 AM, Mark > Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi folks! > > > > We had a few very important changes in the last few > weeks > > > > *) mem leak fix > > *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions > > *) lazy SessionContext creation > > *) site fix (currently in progress locally) > > *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout > support > > *) lots of EJB improvements > > > > I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 > tomorrow, WDYT? > > If you like to complete/test some feature which you > think must go into this release, then please ping me. > > Before 1.0, should we update the name of the openwebbeans/ > subdirectories and/or the maven output jars for > ejb/openejb? > > webbeans-ejb produces webbeans-ejb-common.jar (which does > not depend on openejb) > webbeans-openejb produces webbeans-ejb.jar (which depends > on openejb) > > Just my pet peeve/confusion, if they were just > ejb-common/ejb-common > and ejb-openejb/ejb-openejb (or openejb/openejb) it would > be less > confusing. > > Of course I have no idea of the conventions in this area, > the > packaging ramifications, or am able to actually do the work > :) > > -- > Eric Covener > [email protected] >
