You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tomee.apache.org by David Blevins <da...@visi.com> on 2008/03/04 10:10:37 UTC
EJB 3.1 Early Draft
FYI to all out there, we on the EJB 3.1 Expert Group have put up a
Early Draft of the EJB 3.1 specification.
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/edr/jsr318/index.html
The review will be open till March 30, 2008.
-David
Re: EJB 3.1 Early Draft
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:50 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 4, 2008, at 1:32 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
>
> > David I have 2 questions
> >
> > 1- Apache replied with NO on that JSR, Will this affect our
> > implementation of EJB3.1 in OpenEJB ?
>
> No. The issue there is primarily around unfair "field of use"
> restrictions on some JSRs, namely Java SE. IIUC, it affects Apache
> Harmony and that is what they are trying to change. If you read the
> vote comments, nearly all the vendors express the same concern.
Yeah I've read the comments but the point was not so clear to me,
thanks for clarification.
>
>
> > 2- Do you need more people in JSR318 (EJB 3.1) Expert Group, as I am
> > applying for the JSPA these days ???
>
> It's all up to Ken, the spec lead. When you have that worked out you
> can apply here: http://jcp.org/en/jsr/egnom?id=318
>
> -David
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 11:10 AM, David Blevins
> > <da...@visi.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> FYI to all out there, we on the EJB 3.1 Expert Group have put up a
> >> Early Draft of the EJB 3.1 specification.
> >>
> >> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/edr/jsr318/index.html
> >>
> >> The review will be open till March 30, 2008.
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> >
>
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
Re: EJB 3.1 Early Draft
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Mar 4, 2008, at 1:32 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> David I have 2 questions
>
> 1- Apache replied with NO on that JSR, Will this affect our
> implementation of EJB3.1 in OpenEJB ?
No. The issue there is primarily around unfair "field of use"
restrictions on some JSRs, namely Java SE. IIUC, it affects Apache
Harmony and that is what they are trying to change. If you read the
vote comments, nearly all the vendors express the same concern.
> 2- Do you need more people in JSR318 (EJB 3.1) Expert Group, as I am
> applying for the JSPA these days ???
It's all up to Ken, the spec lead. When you have that worked out you
can apply here: http://jcp.org/en/jsr/egnom?id=318
-David
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 11:10 AM, David Blevins
> <da...@visi.com> wrote:
>>
>> FYI to all out there, we on the EJB 3.1 Expert Group have put up a
>> Early Draft of the EJB 3.1 specification.
>>
>> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/edr/jsr318/index.html
>>
>> The review will be open till March 30, 2008.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
>
Re: EJB 3.1 Early Draft
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
David I have 2 questions
1- Apache replied with NO on that JSR, Will this affect our
implementation of EJB3.1 in OpenEJB ?
2- Do you need more people in JSR318 (EJB 3.1) Expert Group, as I am
applying for the JSPA these days ???
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 11:10 AM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
>
> FYI to all out there, we on the EJB 3.1 Expert Group have put up a
> Early Draft of the EJB 3.1 specification.
>
> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/edr/jsr318/index.html
>
> The review will be open till March 30, 2008.
>
> -David
>
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour