geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shawn Jiang <>
Subject Re: Can anyone tell me what's the reason to remove the .jar extension in GERONIMO-5253 ?
Date Tue, 08 Mar 2011 07:44:37 GMT
Thanks, David !

I'll try to fix the resovler code  to use jar path instead of moduleId.

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:00 AM, David Blevins <>wrote:

> Thanks, Shawn!
> On Mar 6, 2011, at 6:46 PM, Shawn Jiang wrote:
> > In the changes of JIRA[1] made by Jarek, there are many code[2] added in
> all module builders to remove the .jar extension from module name.  I could
> also find similar change[1] in openejb code.    For EJB module,  because
> openejb will need the .jar style module name to resolve the EJB
> link(xxx.jar#xxx),  the change broke the ejb link cases.
> Looks like we broke the link resolving code when we added the Java EE 6
> <module-name> support.  The link resolving code shouldn't be using the
> moduleId, rather the path of the archive itself.
> Previously there was not spec defined concept of module-name (moduleId for
> us).  When we pushed in the spec module-name concept on top of the existing
> code, things probably got a little confused.  The moduleId vs path logic was
> never very clear in the code previously.  Probably we need to do some tweaks
> in the integration and maybe OpenEJB to get this right.
> > I want to revert the .jar removal code from  EjbModuleBuilder to fix
> this, but I don't want to broke other things because of the revert. Can
> anyone tell me what's the reason to remove the .jar extension ?
> That's the spec defined module name if the <module-name> element isn't set
> in the descriptor.
> -David


View raw message