geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lin Sun <linsun....@gmail.com>
Subject [discuss] update Transaction.commit method signature in jta spec jar
Date Thu, 17 Sep 2009 20:13:21 GMT
Hi,

Recently, I opened GERONIMO-4683 in G about the Transaction.commit
signature is missing the IllegalStateException.  The reason why I
raised this JIRA is because in OSGi RFC 98 (Transaction in OSGi)
compliance test, we use Geronimo's JTA spec jar as the baseline.
During OSGi RFC 98 compliance test run with an implementation of RFC
98, OSGi signature test currently checks strictly on exceptions throw
by each of the method to see if it is the same as the baseline's
signature, which is the Geronimo JTA spec jar.   If it is not the same
the test fail.   For example, below is what is specified by the JTA
java doc and G JTA spec.


G JTA spec jar - Transaction.java
public void commit()
            throws HeuristicMixedException,
                   HeuristicRollbackException,
                   RollbackException,
                   SecurityException,
                   SystemException;


JTA 1.1 Java doc - Transaction.java
public void commit()
            throws RollbackException,
                   HeuristicMixedException,
                   HeuristicRollbackException,
                   SecurityException,
                   IllegalStateException,
                   SystemException

What do you think of adding the missing unchecked exception
"IllegalStateException" back to our JTA spec and release a newer
version of the JTA spec jar just to be the same as what is in the Java
doc?  I think it is good for us to be consistent with what is in the
JTA spec and we should be consistent in declaring the unchecked
exceptions (we currently declares the SecurityException but not the
IllegalStateException).

p.s. if you are interested and have access to, the related discussion
is OSGi alliance can be found here -
https://www.osgi.org/members/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1447

Thanks

Lin

Mime
View raw message