Rick Horowitz wrote:
> b) In TestBeans.jar, the entity nextgen.EntityBMP contains a
> <primkey-field>name</primkey-field> definition.
> EntityMetaData.ImportEjbJarXml(), however, doesn't read this field or
> store it in the meta-data. Either this is a bug or the bean is
> incorrectly defined.
Just reread the spec (ejb1.1, 16.5, p254), primkey-field is used for CMP
only. So the bean is incorrectly defined.
> c) After standardjboss.xml is processed, jboss.xml is processed.
> Container configurations defined in jboss.xml result in newly created
> ConfigurationMetaData objects, even if a ConfigurationMetaData object
> with the same name existed in standardjboss.conf. This makes it
> impossible to modify part of a container configuration defined in
> standardjboss.conf in jboss.conf. Is this the intention?
No, that's a bug.
> 7) JAWS
> a) JAWS meta data:
> i) In JawsEntityMetaData constructor, if the primary key is a simple
> key, I think it should verify that the primary-key-field is a defined
> CMP field after the line:
> (1) CMPFieldMetaData cmpField =
> (CMPFieldMetaData)cmpFields.get(pkFieldName);
Sure.
> 8) Jboss Test - Bank
> a) Verification:
> i) CustomerBean.ejbCreate() returns type java.lang.String but the bank's
> ejb-jar.xml file defines the Customer bean
> <prim-key-class>org.jboss.test.bank.interfaces.CustomerPK</prim-key-class>.
> The return value from ejbCreate() must match the primary key class.
> ii) In JawsEntityMetaData.importXml(), should probably prevent the user
> from setting the read-only time-out entity if read-only is set to false,
> or should issue a warning to the user and then ignore it.
Correct.
> iii) In FinderMetaData.importXml(), the query field element content from
> the banktest application's jaws.xml is not obtained for the jboss
> testbean Account. Instead, a null is found and stored in
> FinderMetaData.query. This is because the spaces in the query element
> content cause 3 elements to be generated, and
> MetaData.getElementContent() returns null.
> query element: <query>balance > {0}</query>
That seems weird to me, I'll look further.
Thanks for the review!
Sebastien
> Regards,
>
> Rick Horowitz
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
