Aaron, I just caught this message. Your characterization that OpenEJB does not have a security service is not entirely correct. As you know from our discussions about implementing JSR88 last month, I've been working on this security service.
Alan OpenEJB Developer > -----Original Message----- > From: Aaron Mulder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 1:38 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OpenEJB > > > You missed the fact that OpenEJB doesn't qualify as a > "working" > container... And I say that as a contributor, not to be > mean. It's generally aimed at 1.1 and there are some major > features currently missing (like security). This is not to > say the energy couldn't be put there instead of elsewhere to > turn out the EJB container for Geronimo, but personally I'm > waiting to see what the imported code looks like before I > start arguing one way or another. Ideally, we'd end up with > the best of both worlds (or next best, two worlds that are > drop-in replacements). I > don't want to see anyone's energy squashed. > > Aaron > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Michael Turilin wrote: > > Why OpenEJB container doesn't used as EJB Container in Geronimo > > project? > > > > As I understand Richard Monson-Haefel now is in the team > > and maybe he could donate existing and WORKING container > > for further development and Geronimo won't need Elba and > JBoss to make > > it's upcoming components useful... > > > > Or I miss something? > > > > Best regards, > > Michael Turilin > > > > > >
