geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@visi.com>
Subject Re: Annotation processing
Date Thu, 04 Jan 2007 07:27:30 GMT

On Jan 2, 2007, at 7:57 PM, Tim McConnell wrote:

> Hi David, thanks for kicking off this discussion and I agree with  
> most of your steps
> below. However, since it seems that "annotations" are now pervasive  
> in many of the JSR
> specifications (i.e., JSRs 77, 88, 175, 181, 220, 250 and probably  
> even more that I
> personally haven't uncovered) it seems like a concise set of  
> responsibilities for all these
> annotation-specific JSRs might mitigate some confusion
> and hopefully prevent overlap and/or conflicts (i.e., who is going  
> to do what).
>
> So for example, I'm responsible for the Geronimo JEE5 Deployment  
> JSR (88) and I'm making these three
> assumptions below:
>
> 1 -- The current Geronimo JSR-88 implementation will be enhanced  
> (by me) to provide a
> "metadata-complete" XML deployment descriptor, which is essentially  
> what you've described
> below in steps 1-3.
> 2 -- The work associated with assumption #1 should encompass as  
> many of the impacted JSRs as
> possible on the Geronimo side from a deployment perspective to  
> minimize the number of
> folks making similar changes to the Geronimo builders/deployers.  
> Thus, these JSRs should be
> encompassed by the JSR-88 implementation for Geronimo:
> 	-- JSR 77 	(JEE5 management--this JSR in particular has already  
> been mentioned as a
> candidate by Paul and Chris and I agree with them)
> 	-- JSR 88	(Deployment)
> 	-- JSR 175 	(Java annotations)
> 	-- JSR 181	(Web Services metadata)
> 	-- JSR 250 	(Common annotations)
> 3 -- Your step number 4 below (add objects to inject resources)  
> feels like a duplicate of
> your step 3 (deploy from the modified xml descriptor...) but again  
> will/should be
> implemented under the auspices of  JSR-88.
>
> So, if that seems reasonable then I would still have a couple  
> questions:
>
> 1 -- Since JSR 220 (EJB) is impacted by annotations, will there be  
> a separate and distinct
> deployment implementation for annotations in OpenEJB ?? I'm  
> guessing yes based on the
> OPENEJB-216 JIRA and all its subtasks but just would again like  
> some validation so as to
> better understand the implications if any from a Geronimo  
> responsibility perspective.
> 2 -- Are there any other JSRs impacted by annotations for JEE5  
> compliance ??
>

Well, that's certainly an interesting idea.  There are 149  
annotations in all of Java EE 5 [1] and only 10 of them are generic  
JSR 250 annotations -- and most specs don't use those.  Are you sure  
consolidating all of them into one task is a good idea?  You'd be  
looking at months of work just to catch up to where most projects  
already are.

If this is truly just about getting meta-data complete descriptors,  
there's really no work for ejbs anyway as there'll be a metadata- 
complete ejb-jar.xml in the GBeans we produce from deployment which  
is the way the current integration satisfies the JSR-88 requirement.

Thoughts?

-David

[1]  Made a list for you http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV/java-ee-5- 
annotations.html


Mime
View raw message