openwebbeans-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: AW: Next Steps - M2 Release
Date Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:31:29 GMT
Hi Mark;

I will also start EJB bean and JMS bean implementations. I will try to create different maven
project for these with name webbeans-ejb and webbeans-jms (I do not know how to manage these
different maven projects with webbeans-impl dependency. It will be much more clear after starting
to do some implementation). Moreover, we can use the "webbeans-geronimo" for integration purposes.

Thanks;

/Gurkan





________________________________
From: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
To: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:04:46 AM
Subject: AW: Next Steps - M2 Release


Hi Gurkan!

I saw the bunch of changes you did the last week and I'm very happy you push these things
forward :)

I hopefully will have more time again starting this weekend.
Currently I have not much I could checkin to SVN (possible publish them to my private git
repo). Most things I did are simply not rdy to be commited yet.

I started a small web service sample with jax-ws to show how OWB could work in such an environment.
But to be honest, there are not many OWB features used in this sample. Mainly IOC injection
and JPA stuff. 
Another thing I'd like to do is to move Matzes facesgoodies sample from Spring to OWB until
start of April (JSF-Days conference).

I also started a webbeans-geronimo package which should contain SPI implementation code for
OpenEJB and other geronimo stuff. But this is also far from rdy. Im also waiting for OpenEJB
folks for help here.

LieGrue,
strub



--- Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com> schrieb am Do, 12.3.2009:

> Von: Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com>
> Betreff: Next Steps - M2 Release
> An: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Datum: Donnerstag, 12. März 2009, 8:54
> Hi Gang,
> 
> I am currently testing the our implementation against the
> JSR-299 TCK. Currently, our implementation is passed 210
> tests of the total 381 TCK standalone tests :) I am hardly
> working on the TCK compatibility. I really want that in the
> end of this month, we are able to release our M2 release
> with passing all TCK tests.
> 
> Belows are the remaining parts of the specification that we
> did not touch or implement partly.
> 
> 1* EJB Beans support --> Not implemented
> 2* XML implementation --> we have implemented partly,
> but needs more work! 
> 3* Context passivation/activation --> Not implemented,
> and how we decide to passivate or activate beans ? (Maybe
> requires Java EE container support)
> 4* Resource injections (Common annotations resources, JMS
> resources, JPA resources etc.) --> Mark is working on the
> JPA injections
> 5* Asynhronous JMS event support --> Not implemented
> 
> Lastly we talked with the Mark, we decided to implement the
> Java EE parts (EJB and JMS) as seperate maven modules from
> the implementation. So anyone is able to use our
> implementation without owning a Java EE container,( Use in
> Tomcat, Jetty or other web container). Also I really like to
> support the OpenWebBeans in Java SE environment. To this
> happen, I have changed discovery mechanism of the project.
> Now, anyone can add its own discovery mechanism. I have
> implemented Java SE and WAR deployment mechanisms so far.
> Default is the WAR deployment. (Currently this depends on
> the javassist!)
> 
> Mark, what are you working on currently? As I remembered
> from last conversations, you created the ejb maven module to
> integrate JPA stuffs. Can you commit this? Or it needs more
> work. I also want to integrate EJB and JMS stuff this week.
> So if you have created the EJB maven modules, please commit
> it and I am able to start on working on the Java EE stuffs.
> 
> WDYT guys about our current situation? Any advice, comment
> ? All of them are welcome :)
> 
> Thanks;
> 
> /Gurkan
> 
> 
>       


      
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message