You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com> on 2008/03/17 17:03:01 UTC
validation -- separate module?
Hi,
Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to learn
EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things which
could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework could be
created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
However, to reach that level , lot of work would need to be done on this
feature. It would not be possible to keep the changes made to validation
with the release requirement dates of OpenEJB. So, I was thinking that could
validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
install? An OpenEJB release will have a default validation jar , lets say
1.0 (for openejb 3.0). But we could independently update the validation
module and its releases and ask users to download and install the latest jar
to have the latest and greatest in validation. This way validation releases
become independent of OpenEJB releases and we can release validation modules
much more frequently.
Since I do not know much about the release process, so I am not sure if the
above is doable or not, or even a direction worth looking into. It would be
nice to know the pros and cons of the above approach, would be good learning
for me.
Thanks!
--
Karan Singh Malhi
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
Check this out Jacek and Karan http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Deal,
>
> As an afterthought, I realized its not required.
> Actually, this idea stemmed from a thought I had about project-specific
> validations.For example, one of the scenarios could be that the project I am
> working on does not use stateful session beans, can I ask openejb to warn me
> if I did accidentally use the Stateful annotation. I know that these kind of
> validations are outside the scope of OpenEJB , and this use-case is more
> suited for code analysis tools, but this is where I started thinking about a
> separate module which could be plugged in. If we do want to support
> project-specific validation, then Mohammad's idea could be a good starting
> point (we still may not need commons validation as our own validation
> framework is pretty good).
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 4:58 AM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
> > > deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to
> > learn
> > > EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things
> > which
> > > could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework
> > could be
> > > created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
> >
> > Isn't openejb small enough to be able to handle this scenario well?
> > Whenever a ejb provider (developer) breaks anything, openejb tells
> > what it is and after a change everything is run again. The startup
> > time of openejb would definitely be improved, but I don't think that's
> > what you meant.
> >
> > > So, I was thinking that could
> > > validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
> > > separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
> > > install?
> >
> > I disagree. If we're still uncertain whether it should be a separate
> > module or not, it means it is not ready yet to become a separate
> > module. I'm sure one day when the validation part becomes
> > feature-richer you'll know it's time to plug it out. Let's give it a
> > bit more time until it's ready. Deal?
> >
> > Jacek
> >
> > --
> > Jacek Laskowski
> > http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl <http://www.jaceklaskowski.pl/>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Karan Singh Malhi
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
Deal,
As an afterthought, I realized its not required.
Actually, this idea stemmed from a thought I had about project-specific
validations.For example, one of the scenarios could be that the project I am
working on does not use stateful session beans, can I ask openejb to warn me
if I did accidentally use the Stateful annotation. I know that these kind of
validations are outside the scope of OpenEJB , and this use-case is more
suited for code analysis tools, but this is where I started thinking about a
separate module which could be plugged in. If we do want to support
project-specific validation, then Mohammad's idea could be a good starting
point (we still may not need commons validation as our own validation
framework is pretty good).
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 4:58 AM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
> > deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to
> learn
> > EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things
> which
> > could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework
> could be
> > created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
>
> Isn't openejb small enough to be able to handle this scenario well?
> Whenever a ejb provider (developer) breaks anything, openejb tells
> what it is and after a change everything is run again. The startup
> time of openejb would definitely be improved, but I don't think that's
> what you meant.
>
> > So, I was thinking that could
> > validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
> > separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
> > install?
>
> I disagree. If we're still uncertain whether it should be a separate
> module or not, it means it is not ready yet to become a separate
> module. I'm sure one day when the validation part becomes
> feature-richer you'll know it's time to plug it out. Let's give it a
> bit more time until it's ready. Deal?
>
> Jacek
>
> --
> Jacek Laskowski
> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl <http://www.jaceklaskowski.pl/>
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
> deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to learn
> EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things which
> could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework could be
> created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
Isn't openejb small enough to be able to handle this scenario well?
Whenever a ejb provider (developer) breaks anything, openejb tells
what it is and after a change everything is run again. The startup
time of openejb would definitely be improved, but I don't think that's
what you meant.
> So, I was thinking that could
> validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
> separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
> install?
I disagree. If we're still uncertain whether it should be a separate
module or not, it means it is not ready yet to become a separate
module. I'm sure one day when the validation part becomes
feature-richer you'll know it's time to plug it out. Let's give it a
bit more time until it's ready. Deal?
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
Karan
np :), I will be happy of my opinion is right but ur investigation
will make us more sure about it :D, thanks in advance Karan.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 1:07 AM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mohammad,
>
> I would like to spend a bit more time with validation to make sure I
> understand it better before commenting on your idea :)
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
>
>
> nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > HI Karan...
> >
> > I know that commons validation was not originally made for EJB
> > validation tasks, but from what I've read yesterday I think it can be
> > changed to our needs, or at least we can take the idea being the
> > validation tasks can be configured using XML files, at that point
> > people can really download the lasted rules from whatever source we
> > provide them, and in OpenEJB we will provide an engine which will
> > parse those rules and validate them against a deployed module. So this
> > way we provided both ideas
> >
> > 1- The validator being configurable wihout the need to change the code
> > and make another set of binaries.
> >
> > 2- The code itself of the validation is distributed with OpenEJB as I
> > suggested.
> >
> > what do u think ?
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Thanks Mohammad,
> > >
> > > Not sure how commons validator would help in this scenario. Commons
> > > validator is a different kind of validation, whereas I was talking more
> > from
> > > the perpective of checking if the ejb jar itself was valid. For
> > example, a
> > > SLSB not having a corresponding interface , or using an annotation in
> > the
> > > wrong location.
> > >
> > > Regarding validation being part of OpenEJB, I definitely agree with
> > that. I
> > > was thinking that maybe we could extract a separate jar for validation
> > which
> > > could be enhanced without depending on a release of OpenEJB itself. The
> > > latest version of the jar would definitely be part of an OpenEJB
> > release,
> > > its just between OpenEJB versions, where people might just want to
> > upgrade
> > > to a better validation check, they might want to bring in the latest
> > jar for
> > > validation without touching the rest of the installation.
> > >
> > > I am just over thinking probably, people can simply use the snapshot
> > > version of OpenEJB. :)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
> > > nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Karan...
> > > >
> > > > There is an Apache Commons Validator component, which mostly
> > > > designed for validating form submitted data, but it is extensible so
> > > > we can use it as a core for our validation process. But allow me to
> > > > disagree with you about making the validator as a separate module
> > > > regarding distribution with OpenEJB, cause validation is a must for
> > > > having a compliant EJB container as I remember from the specs -
> > please
> > > > some one corrects me if I am wrong - but I agree regarding that
> > making
> > > > it a separate module and it is actually a separate module on JIRA so
> > > > we can assign enhancements issues on it. And if we found that the
> > > > Commons Validator component can be useful for us I think we should
> > use
> > > > it as out validation frame-work as DBlevins used the CLI one.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse
> > OpenEJB
> > > > > deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want
> > to
> > > > learn
> > > > > EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many
> > things
> > > > which
> > > > > could be done in validation itself. For example, a little
> > framework
> > > > could be
> > > > > created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..)
> > .
> > > > > However, to reach that level , lot of work would need to be done
> > on
> > > > this
> > > > > feature. It would not be possible to keep the changes made to
> > > > validation
> > > > > with the release requirement dates of OpenEJB. So, I was thinking
> > that
> > > > could
> > > > > validation be its own separate module where we could release its
> > jars
> > > > > separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing
> > OpenEJB
> > > > > install? An OpenEJB release will have a default validation jar ,
> > lets
> > > > say
> > > > > 1.0 (for openejb 3.0). But we could independently update the
> > validation
> > > > > module and its releases and ask users to download and install the
> > > > latest jar
> > > > > to have the latest and greatest in validation. This way validation
> > > > releases
> > > > > become independent of OpenEJB releases and we can release
> > validation
> > > > modules
> > > > > much more frequently.
> > > > > Since I do not know much about the release process, so I am not
> > sure if
> > > > the
> > > > > above is doable or not, or even a direction worth looking into. It
> > > > would be
> > > > > nice to know the pros and cons of the above approach, would be
> > good
> > > > learning
> > > > > for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Karan Singh Malhi
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks
> > > > - Mohammad Nour
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Karan Singh Malhi
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Karan Singh Malhi
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
Mohammad,
I would like to spend a bit more time with validation to make sure I
understand it better before commenting on your idea :)
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> HI Karan...
>
> I know that commons validation was not originally made for EJB
> validation tasks, but from what I've read yesterday I think it can be
> changed to our needs, or at least we can take the idea being the
> validation tasks can be configured using XML files, at that point
> people can really download the lasted rules from whatever source we
> provide them, and in OpenEJB we will provide an engine which will
> parse those rules and validate them against a deployed module. So this
> way we provided both ideas
>
> 1- The validator being configurable wihout the need to change the code
> and make another set of binaries.
>
> 2- The code itself of the validation is distributed with OpenEJB as I
> suggested.
>
> what do u think ?
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks Mohammad,
> >
> > Not sure how commons validator would help in this scenario. Commons
> > validator is a different kind of validation, whereas I was talking more
> from
> > the perpective of checking if the ejb jar itself was valid. For
> example, a
> > SLSB not having a corresponding interface , or using an annotation in
> the
> > wrong location.
> >
> > Regarding validation being part of OpenEJB, I definitely agree with
> that. I
> > was thinking that maybe we could extract a separate jar for validation
> which
> > could be enhanced without depending on a release of OpenEJB itself. The
> > latest version of the jar would definitely be part of an OpenEJB
> release,
> > its just between OpenEJB versions, where people might just want to
> upgrade
> > to a better validation check, they might want to bring in the latest
> jar for
> > validation without touching the rest of the installation.
> >
> > I am just over thinking probably, people can simply use the snapshot
> > version of OpenEJB. :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
> > nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Karan...
> > >
> > > There is an Apache Commons Validator component, which mostly
> > > designed for validating form submitted data, but it is extensible so
> > > we can use it as a core for our validation process. But allow me to
> > > disagree with you about making the validator as a separate module
> > > regarding distribution with OpenEJB, cause validation is a must for
> > > having a compliant EJB container as I remember from the specs -
> please
> > > some one corrects me if I am wrong - but I agree regarding that
> making
> > > it a separate module and it is actually a separate module on JIRA so
> > > we can assign enhancements issues on it. And if we found that the
> > > Commons Validator component can be useful for us I think we should
> use
> > > it as out validation frame-work as DBlevins used the CLI one.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse
> OpenEJB
> > > > deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want
> to
> > > learn
> > > > EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many
> things
> > > which
> > > > could be done in validation itself. For example, a little
> framework
> > > could be
> > > > created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..)
> .
> > > > However, to reach that level , lot of work would need to be done
> on
> > > this
> > > > feature. It would not be possible to keep the changes made to
> > > validation
> > > > with the release requirement dates of OpenEJB. So, I was thinking
> that
> > > could
> > > > validation be its own separate module where we could release its
> jars
> > > > separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing
> OpenEJB
> > > > install? An OpenEJB release will have a default validation jar ,
> lets
> > > say
> > > > 1.0 (for openejb 3.0). But we could independently update the
> validation
> > > > module and its releases and ask users to download and install the
> > > latest jar
> > > > to have the latest and greatest in validation. This way validation
> > > releases
> > > > become independent of OpenEJB releases and we can release
> validation
> > > modules
> > > > much more frequently.
> > > > Since I do not know much about the release process, so I am not
> sure if
> > > the
> > > > above is doable or not, or even a direction worth looking into. It
> > > would be
> > > > nice to know the pros and cons of the above approach, would be
> good
> > > learning
> > > > for me.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Karan Singh Malhi
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks
> > > - Mohammad Nour
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Karan Singh Malhi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
HI Karan...
I know that commons validation was not originally made for EJB
validation tasks, but from what I've read yesterday I think it can be
changed to our needs, or at least we can take the idea being the
validation tasks can be configured using XML files, at that point
people can really download the lasted rules from whatever source we
provide them, and in OpenEJB we will provide an engine which will
parse those rules and validate them against a deployed module. So this
way we provided both ideas
1- The validator being configurable wihout the need to change the code
and make another set of binaries.
2- The code itself of the validation is distributed with OpenEJB as I suggested.
what do u think ?
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Mohammad,
>
> Not sure how commons validator would help in this scenario. Commons
> validator is a different kind of validation, whereas I was talking more from
> the perpective of checking if the ejb jar itself was valid. For example, a
> SLSB not having a corresponding interface , or using an annotation in the
> wrong location.
>
> Regarding validation being part of OpenEJB, I definitely agree with that. I
> was thinking that maybe we could extract a separate jar for validation which
> could be enhanced without depending on a release of OpenEJB itself. The
> latest version of the jar would definitely be part of an OpenEJB release,
> its just between OpenEJB versions, where people might just want to upgrade
> to a better validation check, they might want to bring in the latest jar for
> validation without touching the rest of the installation.
>
> I am just over thinking probably, people can simply use the snapshot
> version of OpenEJB. :)
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
> nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Karan...
> >
> > There is an Apache Commons Validator component, which mostly
> > designed for validating form submitted data, but it is extensible so
> > we can use it as a core for our validation process. But allow me to
> > disagree with you about making the validator as a separate module
> > regarding distribution with OpenEJB, cause validation is a must for
> > having a compliant EJB container as I remember from the specs - please
> > some one corrects me if I am wrong - but I agree regarding that making
> > it a separate module and it is actually a separate module on JIRA so
> > we can assign enhancements issues on it. And if we found that the
> > Commons Validator component can be useful for us I think we should use
> > it as out validation frame-work as DBlevins used the CLI one.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
> > > deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to
> > learn
> > > EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things
> > which
> > > could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework
> > could be
> > > created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
> > > However, to reach that level , lot of work would need to be done on
> > this
> > > feature. It would not be possible to keep the changes made to
> > validation
> > > with the release requirement dates of OpenEJB. So, I was thinking that
> > could
> > > validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
> > > separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
> > > install? An OpenEJB release will have a default validation jar , lets
> > say
> > > 1.0 (for openejb 3.0). But we could independently update the validation
> > > module and its releases and ask users to download and install the
> > latest jar
> > > to have the latest and greatest in validation. This way validation
> > releases
> > > become independent of OpenEJB releases and we can release validation
> > modules
> > > much more frequently.
> > > Since I do not know much about the release process, so I am not sure if
> > the
> > > above is doable or not, or even a direction worth looking into. It
> > would be
> > > nice to know the pros and cons of the above approach, would be good
> > learning
> > > for me.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > --
> > > Karan Singh Malhi
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Karan Singh Malhi
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Mohammad,
Not sure how commons validator would help in this scenario. Commons
validator is a different kind of validation, whereas I was talking more from
the perpective of checking if the ejb jar itself was valid. For example, a
SLSB not having a corresponding interface , or using an annotation in the
wrong location.
Regarding validation being part of OpenEJB, I definitely agree with that. I
was thinking that maybe we could extract a separate jar for validation which
could be enhanced without depending on a release of OpenEJB itself. The
latest version of the jar would definitely be part of an OpenEJB release,
its just between OpenEJB versions, where people might just want to upgrade
to a better validation check, they might want to bring in the latest jar for
validation without touching the rest of the installation.
I am just over thinking probably, people can simply use the snapshot
version of OpenEJB. :)
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Karan...
>
> There is an Apache Commons Validator component, which mostly
> designed for validating form submitted data, but it is extensible so
> we can use it as a core for our validation process. But allow me to
> disagree with you about making the validator as a separate module
> regarding distribution with OpenEJB, cause validation is a must for
> having a compliant EJB container as I remember from the specs - please
> some one corrects me if I am wrong - but I agree regarding that making
> it a separate module and it is actually a separate module on JIRA so
> we can assign enhancements issues on it. And if we found that the
> Commons Validator component can be useful for us I think we should use
> it as out validation frame-work as DBlevins used the CLI one.
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
> > deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to
> learn
> > EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things
> which
> > could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework
> could be
> > created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
> > However, to reach that level , lot of work would need to be done on
> this
> > feature. It would not be possible to keep the changes made to
> validation
> > with the release requirement dates of OpenEJB. So, I was thinking that
> could
> > validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
> > separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
> > install? An OpenEJB release will have a default validation jar , lets
> say
> > 1.0 (for openejb 3.0). But we could independently update the validation
> > module and its releases and ask users to download and install the
> latest jar
> > to have the latest and greatest in validation. This way validation
> releases
> > become independent of OpenEJB releases and we can release validation
> modules
> > much more frequently.
> > Since I do not know much about the release process, so I am not sure if
> the
> > above is doable or not, or even a direction worth looking into. It
> would be
> > nice to know the pros and cons of the above approach, would be good
> learning
> > for me.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --
> > Karan Singh Malhi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
>
--
Karan Singh Malhi
Re: validation -- separate module?
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
Hi Karan...
There is an Apache Commons Validator component, which mostly
designed for validating form submitted data, but it is extensible so
we can use it as a core for our validation process. But allow me to
disagree with you about making the validator as a separate module
regarding distribution with OpenEJB, cause validation is a must for
having a compliant EJB container as I remember from the specs - please
some one corrects me if I am wrong - but I agree regarding that making
it a separate module and it is actually a separate module on JIRA so
we can assign enhancements issues on it. And if we found that the
Commons Validator component can be useful for us I think we should use
it as out validation frame-work as DBlevins used the CLI one.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Karan Malhi <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Was just trying things out with validation. The more I abuse OpenEJB
> deploy(which is actually using validation the right way if I want to learn
> EJB :)) , the more I end up using validation. There are so many things which
> could be done in validation itself. For example, a little framework could be
> created to give a more feature rich help (interactive help etc..) .
> However, to reach that level , lot of work would need to be done on this
> feature. It would not be possible to keep the changes made to validation
> with the release requirement dates of OpenEJB. So, I was thinking that could
> validation be its own separate module where we could release its jars
> separately, which could simply be dropped in into an existing OpenEJB
> install? An OpenEJB release will have a default validation jar , lets say
> 1.0 (for openejb 3.0). But we could independently update the validation
> module and its releases and ask users to download and install the latest jar
> to have the latest and greatest in validation. This way validation releases
> become independent of OpenEJB releases and we can release validation modules
> much more frequently.
> Since I do not know much about the release process, so I am not sure if the
> above is doable or not, or even a direction worth looking into. It would be
> nice to know the pros and cons of the above approach, would be good learning
> for me.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Karan Singh Malhi
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour