geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Can anyone tell me what's the reason to remove the .jar extension in GERONIMO-5253 ?
Date Wed, 09 Mar 2011 04:22:36 GMT
That looks pretty good!

I'll trade you patches.  I haven't yet been able to verify if this works, but the idea is
clear -- just use the code we need.  

 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-5855

My TCK setup got messed up somehow and I'm currently re-downloading it, but I figure you might
be able to verify it a little quicker.


-David

On Mar 8, 2011, at 7:17 AM, Shawn Jiang wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> I just attached a patch to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-1439
> 
> All ejblink cases passed locally with the patch.  Could you help review it ?  
> 
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:00 AM, David Blevins <david.blevins@gmail.com> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Shawn


Mime
View raw message