search

jakartaee / messaging

Jakarta Messaging
https://eclipse.org/ee4j/messaging
Other
39 stars 32 forks source link

Initial spec doc contribution for Jakarta EE #275

Closed OndroMih closed 4 years ago

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

Initial modifications by @tivrfoa of the donated document for Jakarta EE. This is a follow-up for #267, which was closed before merged.

This pull request builds on #273. After #273, this PR will only contain changes made in the donated document to make it easier to review.

(This PR replaces #274 which wasn't synchronized with master and didn't show only diffs in the spec file)

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

@hussainnm, I'm going to fix the wrong references to JCA, EJB and JTA.

I'm not sure whether to change references to "EJB Container" because the spec in the master branch of Jakarta Enterprise Beans currently still defines it as "EJB Container". I also asked about it in the Enterprise Beans github issue here: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/ejb-api/issues/99#issuecomment-625330813

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

The Enterprise Beans PR https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/ejb-api/pull/96/files#diff-adade127f19060d71cb75f896da4c40cR89 proposes to change "EJB Container" to "Enterprise Beans Container". I'll replace "EJB Container" to match that.

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

@hussainnm, I've replaced all references to JCA, EJB and JTA:

I also removed the scope section which became redundant. It caused that the section numbers were shifted and it was there only as a stub before the Java EE document was donated.

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

No problem with raising more issues as you continue reviewing the document, @hussainnm. I'm glad that you're so thorough. Is it OK if I keep fixing issues you report as soon as possible or if I wait until you're finished with your review? What's more convenient for you?

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

Thanks for more comments, @hussainnm.

I believe I've fixed all except I didn't change keywords in the text as it would be too much work now and also would pollute the diff for this PR. I may raise a separate PR after this is merged.

Here's what I've fixed today:

OndroMih commented 4 years ago

Line 6052 and 6074 is missing closing block.

Fixed. There were a few more which I discovered using a regex search.

arjantijms commented 4 years ago

Amazing work everyone! Thanks a bunch :)

I'll merge this now. If there are additional changes needed they can be done in follow-up PRs.