You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> on 2007/03/14 08:53:16 UTC
MDBs working in 2.0
I believe that I have MDBs working in 2.0 (and the tck). In general
they should work about as well as Stateless beans do, but haven't
received as much testing.
I also believe I have broken transaction recovery for the time being.
-dain
Re: MDBs working in 2.0
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Mar 14, 2007, at 5:46 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Mar 14, 2007, at 3:53 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>
>> I believe that I have MDBs working in 2.0 (and the tck). In
>> general they should work about as well as Stateless beans do, but
>> haven't received as much testing.
>
> That's great. Nice stuff.
>
>>
>> I also believe I have broken transaction recovery for the time being.
>
> K. Did you create a Jira so that we can keep track of this? Don't
> want it to be forgotten... Some information on how it's broken
> would be helpful.
GERONIMO-2969
-dain
Re: MDBs working in 2.0
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Mar 14, 2007, at 3:53 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> I believe that I have MDBs working in 2.0 (and the tck). In
> general they should work about as well as Stateless beans do, but
> haven't received as much testing.
That's great. Nice stuff.
>
> I also believe I have broken transaction recovery for the time being.
K. Did you create a Jira so that we can keep track of this? Don't
want it to be forgotten... Some information on how it's broken would
be helpful.
--kevan
Re: MDBs working in 2.0
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> I believe that I have MDBs working in 2.0 (and the tck). In general
> they should work about as well as Stateless beans do, but haven't
> received as much testing.
Super!
>
> I also believe I have broken transaction recovery for the time being.
>
> -dain
>