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 Fri, 05 Jan 2007 00:13:34 GMT

On Jan 4, 2007, at 3:13 PM, Tim McConnell wrote:

> Now that's very interesting, I've been using the "Annotation Type  
> Hierarchy" from http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/overview- 
> tree.html but your list appears to be more accurate.....

Seems like they're missing these two:

   javax.xml.ws.addressing.Action
   javax.xml.ws.addressing.FaultAction

Strange....

-David


>
> David Blevins wrote:
>> On Jan 4, 2007, at 12:22 PM, Tim McConnell wrote:
>>> Hi David, your definitive list of JEE5 annotations is wonderful-- 
>>> I've been looking all over the
>>> place trying to locate the authoritative source. Where/how did  
>>> you find them ??
>>>
>> Grepped all the spec jars and compared that against the TCK for  
>> accuracy and to fill in any missing.
>> -David
>>>
>>> David Blevins wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> --Thanks,
>>> Tim McConnell
>>>
>
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Tim McConnell
>


Mime
View raw message