On Aug 14, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Mohammed Nour wrote:
Hi David...
On 8/15/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We do have deployment and runtime support for POJO
Stateless and Stateful beans that have component interfaces (home/
remote). It just uses the deployment descriptor instead of
Annotations.
Anyone have any thoughts on doing OPENEJB-145 as I detail in this
email? http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openejb-
development&m=115481372914101&w=2
I could deploy an EJB that has a local Home and local Components
interfaces
as OPENEJB-146 requires, but we need to make some changes in the
deployment
process more specifically in the validation step so we can deploy
an EJB
with a business interface only, I think the current implementation
requires
an EJB to have local\remote Home and Component interfaces. So we
need to
open JIRA(s) to address this feature and implement it so we can have a
running iTests for the new features of EJB3.0 .
Right, completing OPENEJB-146 requires Business Interface support
(OPENEJB-90). Thanks for the note on validation of business
interfaces, I've added another sub-task to OPENEJB-90. So that gives
us:
[OPENEJB-90] Business Interface support
1 [OPENEJB-91] Remote business interfaces via EJBd Server
2 [OPENEJB-92] Remote business interfaces via IntraVM Server
3 [OPENEJB-93] Local business interfaces via IntraVM Server
4 [OPENEJB-94] SessionContext.getBusinessObject(interface)
5 [OPENEJB-95] JNDI ENC Business Interface references
6 [OPENEJB-96] Global JNDI Business Interface references
7 [OPENEJB-97] SessionContext.getInvokedBusinessInterface
8 [OPENEJB-254] Validation of Business Interfaces
At this point we could do all the tests that relate to testing a POJO
Stateless or Stateful bean with Home/Remote and related interfaces.
The deployment/runtime support for those should be done. So these
should be ripe for the picking.
[OPENEJB-145] iTest: StatelessRemoteJndiTests
[OPENEJB-147] iTest: StatelessHomeIntfcTests
[OPENEJB-148] iTest: StatelessEjbHomeTests
[OPENEJB-149] iTest: StatelessEjbObjectTests
[OPENEJB-152] iTest: StatelessRemoteIntfcTests
[OPENEJB-154] iTest: StatelessHomeHandleTests
[OPENEJB-155] iTest: StatelessHandleTests
[OPENEJB-156] iTest: StatelessEjbMetaDataTests
[OPENEJB-159] iTest: StatelessBeanJndiEncTests (most of it)
[OPENEJB-162] iTest: StatelessBeanCallbackTests
[OPENEJB-163] iTest: StatelessBeanAllowedOperationsTests
[OPENEJB-164] iTest: StatelessBeanBMTAllowedOperationsTests
[OPENEJB-165] iTest: StatelessBeanTxTests
[OPENEJB-166] iTest: StatelessContainerTxTests
[OPENEJB-169] iTest: StatelessRemoteRmiIiopTests
[OPENEJB-171] iTest: StatefulRemoteJndiTests
[OPENEJB-173] iTest: StatefulHomeIntfcTests
[OPENEJB-174] iTest: StatefulEjbHomeTests
[OPENEJB-175] iTest: StatefulEjbObjectTests
[OPENEJB-178] iTest: StatefulRemoteIntfcTests
[OPENEJB-180] iTest: StatefulHomeHandleTests
[OPENEJB-181] iTest: StatefulHandleTests
[OPENEJB-182] iTest: StatefulEjbMetaDataTests
[OPENEJB-185] iTest: StatefulBeanJndiEncTests (most of it)
[OPENEJB-188] iTest: StatefulBeanCallbackTests
[OPENEJB-189] iTest: StatefulBeanAllowedOperationsTests
[OPENEJB-190] iTest: StatefulBeanBMTAllowedOperationsTests
[OPENEJB-191] iTest: StatefulBeanTxTests
[OPENEJB-192] iTest: StatefulContainerTxTests
[OPENEJB-195] iTest: StatefulRemoteRmiIiopTests
We can do whatever, these tests or others or no tests at all and work
on other stuff. Up to you guys.
What's the game plan?
-David
-David
> Regards,
> Paulo
>
> On 8/14/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2006, at 6:49 AM, Mohammed Nour wrote:
>>
>> > Hi DBlevins...
>> >
>> > Concerning the iTests, I and Paulo suggest that we own the impl
>> of the
>> > missing of EJB3.0 deployment time features, like using
annotations,
>> > this
>> > will help us deploying our test beans and in the same time u did
>> > the impl of
>> > the run time so we can test it too, this will be with the
impl of
>> > the iTests
>> > ofcaurse, so what do u think ?
>>
>> I have to apologize, I didn't follow that sentence too well.
>>
>> Maybe you can explain your game-plan in terms of JIRA items you'd
>> like to work on.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>> > Thanks and best regards...
>> > Mohammad Nour El-Din
>> >
>> >
>> > On 8/4/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Jul 25, 2006, at 5:24 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > On Jul 24, 2006, at 1:35 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Going to take a whack at support for EJB 3 POJO Style beans.
>> >> >> Thinking to start here http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/
>> OPENEJB-76
>> >> >
>> >> > Got some trivial support in the stateless container. It
longer
>> >> > assumes that all bean instances are subclasses of
SessionBean.
>> >> > Considered dynamically subclassing each bean class to adapt
>> it to
>> >> > be a SessionBean class, but that would add significant
>> overhead to
>> >> > startup. The other downer would be you'd never get to see
your
>> >> > bean classname in the stacktrace, only the generated class
name.
>> >>
>> >> Got something in for the stateful container now too. What
we have
>> >> now is the ability to support a pojo lifecycle on a
stateless or
>> >> stateful session bean. The bean class doesn't have to
import any
>> >> javax.ejb classes, interfaces or annotations at all.
>> >>
>> >> The bean must be configured via the ejb-jar.xml. We still
>> don't have
>> >> support for the related annotations @PostConstruct,
@PreDestroy,
>> >> @PrePassivate, and @PostActivate (OPENEJB-216). Nor full
>> dependency
>> >> injection (OPENEJB-98), nor for business local or business
remote
>> >> interfaces quite yet (OPENEJB-90).
>> >>
>> >> Getting the business interfaces to work will be the next thing.
>> >>
>> >> -David
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Paulo Lopes
> www.scratchydreams.com
>
