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 22:48:25 GMT

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
>


Mime
View raw message