| 
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please reply to the sender and destroy all copies of the original
 message. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email, and/or any action taken in reliance on the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Where permitted by applicable law,
 this e-mail and other e-mail communications sent to and from Cognizant e-mail addresses may be monitored.I vote for Option A.   Thanks Hussain   
From: ejb-dev
 <ejb-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of 
Edwin DerksSent: Friday, March 5, 2021 1:46 PM
 To: ejb developer discussions <ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
 Subject: Re: [ejb-dev] [VOTE] Handling of PortableRemoteObject.narrow
   
Hi,
 
I'm just an outsider listening in, but I think Option A is the way to go as long as we have people using PortableRemoteObject.narrow.   
I’m not sure if I fully understand the discussion so far, but I
 would vote for A. We still have a lot of customers using PortableRemoteObject.narrow.   Best Regards, Hiroki   
  
Subject: [VOTE] Handling of PortableRemoteObject.narrow 
Date:
March 1, 2021 at 7:50:07 PM PST   
Here's the vote as promised last week.  I think I can predict the outcome based on recent
 conversation, but as we had some miscommunication here an explicit choice / request for input from everyone would be very good.
 As noted in the discussion, the javax.rmi.PortableRemoteObject class has been removed from the JDK so there is some explicit action needed from us to guarantee the portability of applications on JDK 11.
 
 A. PortableRemoteObject.narrow must remain a requirement for users and servers that support EJB 2.x remote interfaces, which is part of the Enterprise Beans 2.x API optional group.  Signature tests will be added to the TCK to verify servers that implement the
 Enterprise Beans 2.x API optional group are compliant.  No specification changes in the Platform or Enterprise Beans specs would be needed for this approach.
 
 B. PortableRemoteObject.narrow is removed, required for no one, and servers deal with this under the covers as they do for EJB 3.0 remote interfaces.  The section of the Platform spec that states PortableRemoteObject.narrow will be updated for Jakarta EE 9.1
  Enterprise Beans spec would be updated at some later date to reflect this is no longer needed.  The PortableRemoteObject.narrow calls in the TCK would be removed.
 
 Both options are orthogonal to if a server does or does not support COBRA.
 
 Let's aim to keep this open for 72 hours so this can be definitively wrapped up Friday morning.
 
 
 --
 David Blevins
 http://twitter.com/dblevins
 http://www.tomitribe.com
   _______________________________________________ejb-dev mailing list
 ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
 To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ejb-dev
 |