Damn. I'm usually more careful than that. It must have been late. Anyway, I'm working up a test case which I'll attach to the bug report.
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 11:32 AM, Scott M Stark wrote: > The silence was most likely due to a poor bug report . There is > no selection of which version this applied to and no example > demonstrating the problem. Start with a testcase that uses a > custom container configuration to set a short passivation timeout. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stephen Coy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 5:23 PM > Subject: [JBoss-dev] Stateful Session Beans are not EJB2.0 yet > > >> Hi, >> >> I raised a bug (#541855) about this a while ago, which has met a >> distressing amount of silence. >> >> In short, stateful session beans fail to passivate if they have >> EJBLocalObject or EJBLocalHome objects as instance fields. Therefore, >> they fail to comply with 7.4.1 of the EJB 2.0 spec. >> >> I would tackle fixing this myself, but I don't yet know my way around >> inside the guts of JBoss well enough yet. Maybe one of the gurus can >> spend ten or fifteen minutes describing how to go about it - and then >> I'll be happy to write and test the implementation. >> >> Stephen Coy >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jboss-development mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
