[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
[jakartaee-tck-dev] How are we grouping EJB 2.x view test requirements?
|
Per the Jakarta Enterprise Beans spec the original EJB 2.x remote interfaces are marked optional. These optional tests are distinct and orthogonal to any CORBA topics. Do we have these somehow grouped in the TCK and is this grouping (if it exists) separate from any CORBA-related tests?
The background of this question is in relation to PortablRemoteObject.narrow calls, which are currently a requirement users must meet to portably use EJB 2.x remote interfaces. Support for EJB 2.x remote interfaces is optional and this is unrelated to their choice in if they do or do not use CORBA. For example:
- A server that choses to support CORBA may still chose not to support EJB 2.x remote interfaces, opting to only use their CORBA support to enable EJB 3.x remote interface views.
- A server that choses not to support CORBA may chose to support EJB 2.x remote interfaces, in which case they must ensure PortablRemoteObject.narrow is present.
Either way, this axiom is currently true:
- If an application uses EJB 2.x remote interfaces it must also use PortablRemoteObject.narrow as it does not know if the target server does or does not use CORBA.
Where discussions are currently if we were to keep PortablRemoteObject.narrow, we would need it tied to an implementation's decision to support the optional EJB 2.x interfaces. We would not be able to tie PortablRemoteObject.narrow calls to any CORBA-related flags or settings as has been previously discussed.
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
