The only concern I have with this is the multiple jar and getting it setup correctly from a user's point of view. If this is clearly and neatly laid out in the docs, then it shouldn't be a problem. Sorry for the tardiness of this email.

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 19:57, John D. Ament <> wrote:

I've been working diligently (whenever I have time) to get the seam JMS module up and running on the new test suite format.  One thing I've noticed is that because of the caveats of using JMS In SE vs. EE, it didn't just work to run weld ee embedded and within a container tests by themselves.  It also became clear that in general this wouldn't work outside of a container because of differences in how to start open mq vs. hornetq vs. activemq.  Even working in a remote JNDI provider (similar to how weblogic JMS works) it wouldn't have worked quite right.

Soemthing I started a while ago (maybe 4-5 weeks) was to separate various impls to different modules.  I want to go ahead and move forward with this approach.  This would provide the main api and impl (across all impls) as well as a domain specific impl (e.g. seam-jms-ee-impl) that contains functionality for EE environments.  As a result, when running the test suite, you are verifying the api, impl, the domain specific impl and the test suite for that specific combination.

Does anyone have any concerns with this approach?


seam-dev mailing list

Jason Porter

Software Engineer
Open Source Advocate
Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling

PGP key id: 926CCFF5
PGP key available at:,