Does this mean there’ll be a final EJB3 release for AS 4.2? Galder Zamarreño Sr. Software Maintenance Engineer JBoss, a division of Red Hat IT executives: Red Hat still #1 for value http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/ ______________________________________________________________________ From:jboss-development-bounces@lists.jboss.org [mailto:jboss-development-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Andrig T Miller Sent: 29 November 2006 23:05 To: Scott M Stark Cc: Scott M Stark; JBoss.org development list; JavaEE-TCK; Ivelin Ivanov Subject: [jboss-dev] Re: Fwd: AS 5 Beta 2 Discussion I agree. In fact, we specifically created 4.2 for these types of issues. With the inclusion of EJB 3 in 4.2 as fully supported technology, we should make this as clean as possible. Andy On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 11:11 -0800, Scott M Stark wrote: Yes, its work to align the remoting uses. This has to be done for jboss5, and ejb3 pulls this issue into 4.2. I don't see keeping the legacy remoting layers as default as beneficial for 4.2. Tom Elrod wrote: >> 2. A related issue is alignment on jboss-remoting transports. There was >> a jira issue to make the pooled invoker the default. The real question >> is why don't we move to the unified invoker based on remoting to align >> the transports between 4.2/5/ejb3. > > I was thinking the main reason we didn't switch to using unified > invokers for 4.x was due to needing to update docs and training > materials (since config would be completely different). However, if > this is not an issue and would prefer to switch default to be unified > invoker for 4.2, the change to standardjboss.xml, jboss-service.xml, > and cluster-service.xml is simple (but still have the issue of where > else needs to be changed, such as client user tx, testsuite, jmx > invoker, etc.). Andrig (Andy) Miller VP, Engineering JBoss, a division of Red Hat

Sure, but in reality, would this be the 'final', only renamed as something else (EJB 2.99?) to get around the licensing issue? -- Manik Surtani Lead, JBoss Cache JBoss, a division of Red Hat Email: manik(a)jboss.org Telephone: +44 7786 702 706 MSN: manik(a)surtani.org Yahoo/AIM/Skype: maniksurtani On 30 Nov 2006, at 17:28, Andrig T Miller wrote: > No, it does not, just a supportable release. We actually cannot > call our EJB 3 final in AS 4.2, due to the licensing issues. The > only final will be in AS 5. > > Andy > > On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 18:05 -0600, Galder Zamarreno wrote: > > > Does this mean there’ll be a final EJB3 release for AS 4.2? > > > > Galder Zamarreño > > Sr. Software Maintenance Engineer > > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > > > > IT executives: Red Hat still #1 for value > > http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/ > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________ > > > > From:jboss-development-bounces@lists.jboss.org > > [mailto:jboss-development-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of > > Andrig T Miller > > Sent: 29 November 2006 23:05 > > To: Scott M Stark > > Cc: Scott M Stark; JBoss.org development list; JavaEE-TCK; Ivelin > > Ivanov > > Subject: [jboss-dev] Re: Fwd: AS 5 Beta 2 Discussion > > > > > > > > > > I agree. In fact, we specifically created 4.2 for these types of > > issues. With the inclusion of EJB 3 in 4.2 as fully supported > > technology, we should make this as clean as possible. > > > > Andy > > > > On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 11:11 -0800, Scott M Stark wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, its work to align the remoting uses. This has to be done for > > jboss5, and ejb3 pulls this issue into 4.2. I don't see keeping the > > legacy remoting layers as default as beneficial for 4.2. > > > > Tom Elrod wrote: > > >> 2. A related issue is alignment on jboss-remoting transports. There was > > >> a jira issue to make the pooled invoker the default. The real question > > >> is why don't we move to the unified invoker based on remoting to align > > >> the transports between 4.2/5/ejb3. > > > > > > I was thinking the main reason we didn't switch to using unified > > > invokers for 4.x was due to needing to update docs and training > > > materials (since config would be completely different). However, if > > > this is not an issue and would prefer to switch default to be unified > > > invoker for 4.2, the change to standardjboss.xml, jboss-service.xml, > > > and cluster-service.xml is simple (but still have the issue of where > > > else needs to be changed, such as client user tx, testsuite, jmx > > > invoker, etc.). > > > > > > Andrig (Andy) Miller > > VP, Engineering > > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrig (Andy) Miller > VP, Engineering > JBoss, a division of Red Hat