Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of chris.m.cardona@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.185 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=A5+hX6utMloeFqDqPZ701Yj/q5XPXM3QNi/Dp2pf3L5vItSqxIZdPrO47lbr2966Q57Y2zJcWatol3oDZwue0mJt/Pwr5grMMQm53qsSY+ujX9zGS+AXB9zLgmaAb1sPa/l9o+yAEjxEDoVU8PE3yL8M9uUmbNRas6Z0T+bIc8I=
Message-ID: <453FFFFE.3080301@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:23:26 -0700
From: "Christopher M. Cardona" <chris.m.cardona@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: J2EE Management for JEE 5
References: <453EF9F9.5020805@gmail.com>
 <3C7A602F-3917-4107-9FA9-AECC123D9CAD@iq80.com>
In-Reply-To: <3C7A602F-3917-4107-9FA9-AECC123D9CAD@iq80.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2006, at 10:45 PM, Christopher M. Cardona wrote:
>
>> 2. JSR77.3.5.0.1 the deploymentDescriptor attribute must provide a 
>> full deployment descriptor based on any partial deployment descriptor 
>> plus deployment annotations.
>
> That doesn't sound like it will be easy. Do they mean that you must 
> build a full deployment descriptor backwards out of the annotations?
>

I�m not exactly sure how to interpret it either. Looks like the 
objective is to make sure the value for 'deploymentDescriptor' attribute 
of J2EEDeployedObject is always set to the combined or full DD (partial 
DD plus deployment annotations). Our current implementation passes the 
DD values to the constructors of the concrete classes that implement 
J2EEDeployedObject. So my guess is checking and manipulation of DD 
should be done inside the classes that call those constructors. Thoughts?

>> My first question is do we even have to update our current JSR 77 
>> implementation to become JEE 5 compliant.
>
> JSR 77 is a weird spec in that is had very few Java APIs specified. 
> The bulk of the spec described the names of fields and operations to 
> be exposed via JMX. You should check if the Java APIs were updated for 
> Java5 generics.
>
Looking at the latest specs there are no API changes. I�ll update this 
thread if I find anything�

Thanks,
chris


> -dain
>