EjbWithoutInterface should be "public static " for consistency otherwise looks ok for me Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-03-26 8:42 GMT+01:00 Tommy Tynjä <[email protected]>: > When can one expect this patch to be evaluated? > > Best regards, > Tommy Tynjä > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Tommy Tynjä <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I've sent a pull request containing the test case and a spelling fix which >> the ASF GitHub bot successfully picked up and attached to the issue in JIRA. >> >> Best regards, >> Tommy Tynjä >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Tommy Tynjä <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Seems like this case is already covered by the AnnotationDeployer. I've >>> created a test case which demonstrates this. So it should be enough to just >>> add the test case to the test suite in order to resolve the issue. See: >>> https://github.com/tommysdk/tomee/commit/ce7ca1abe664f074973f2bf480b9411071af664e >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Tommy Tynjä >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Deployer check blocking things nirmally otherwise we should move these >>>> checks in checkxxxx so id go for checkannotations >>>> Le 15 mars 2014 05:58, "Tommy Tynjä" <[email protected]> a écrit : >>>> >>>> > I started looking at OPENEJB-1836 (Validation: @Local on bean with >>>> > no-interface should use @LocalBean) and have been browsing the code >>>> base >>>> > somewhat. >>>> > >>>> > The check would be rather easy to put into CheckAnnotations, alongside >>>> the >>>> > already present @WebService validation. There are however some @Local >>>> > checks in AnnotationDeployer as well, around row 3064. What would be >>>> the >>>> > most preferrable place to insert this validation? >>>> > >>>> > Best regards, >>>> > Tommy Tynjä >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> >>
