Re: [ejb-dev] [VOTE] Handling of PortableRemoteObject.narrow

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Ahh, thanks, Lance!


---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, Jakarta EE and MicroProfile architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter

Part-time schedule: Tue, Wed, Thu (off on Mon and Fri)



From:
       "Lance
J. Andersen" <lance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       ejb
developer discussions <ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       03/03/2021
14:31
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
Re: [ejb-dev] [VOTE] Handling of PortableRemoteObject.narrow
Sent
by:        "ejb-dev"
<ejb-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>

---

Hi Kevin, Previously this
was covered by the Java SE signature tests as this class was part of the
JDK. You can think of this similar to JAXB/JAXWS. If you used the implementations
within Java SE, then you did not need to run the standalone 
Hi Kevin,

Previously this was covered by the Java
SE signature tests as this class was part of the JDK.  You can think
of this similar to  JAXB/JAXWS.  If you used the implementations
within Java SE, then you did not need to run the standalone TCK for those
technologies.  If you used your own implementation, for example as
Glassfish did with Metro, then the standalone TCKs were required to be
run as part of CTS for Java EE compatibility.

As it is no longer part of the JDK  and
is still required in some configurations, the signatures should be validated
IMHO to help validate compliance/compatibility.

HTH

Best
Lance



On Tue, Mar 2, 2021, 3:11 PM Kevin Sutter
<sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I would vote for
Option A.  I don't think updating the Signature Tests is an absolute
requirement.  If we didn't have them in the past, why are they a requirement
now?  Sure, it would be nice to have them.  But, I don't think
of the Signature tests as a requirement.

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, Jakarta EE and MicroProfile architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx    Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter

Part-time schedule: Tue, Wed, Thu (off on Mon and Fri)



From:        David
Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        ejb
developer discussions <ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        03/01/2021
21:50
Subject:        [EXTERNAL]
[ejb-dev] [VOTE] Handling of PortableRemoteObject.narrow
Sent by:        "ejb-dev"
<ejb-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>

---

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




_______________________________________________
ejb-dev mailing list
ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ejb-dev
_______________________________________________
ejb-dev mailing list
ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ejb-dev

My best,
Lance
--
Lance Andersen
USTA EMA President and CEO
PTR Professional 5A
USPTA Elite Professional
TIA Global Cardio Tennis-Master Trainer
USRSA
Mobile: 978 857-0446
luckydogtennis.com-- luckydogtennis.com/TennisBlog-- cardiotennis.com



_______________________________________________
ejb-dev mailing list
ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ejb-dev