Re: Pending PR related to EJB

Thanks for the comment on the PR. Very valuable and full of details :)

I agree, that a TCK would be valuable for EE11 - as far as I can see, the old test harness is history?
From what I can see in the EE11 TCK, it is all Maven + JUnit5 + Arquillian now ? That would be awesome …

Gruß
Richard

> Am 13.01.2026 um 02:53 schrieb David Blevins <[email protected]>:
> 
> Short version is there is a leak that causes the hander references of Stateful beans to stay in the Handler registry even after the bean's @Remove method is called.
> 
> The fix, however, doesn't work as it relies on the @Remove annotation being present on the interface class which is not legal per spec.  We have a warning we issue when people do that.
> 
> I dig back as far as I could (like 2001) to refresh my memory and I'm not sure we actually need the handler registry.  For 11 we may actually want to try removing it.  We'd need a good TCK setup however as it might have some impact on compliance.  Or rather it would bring a lot of confidence really fast if we knew some basic stuff wasn't breaking.
> 
> If we can get away without it, that whole code would certainly be much simpler.
> 
> 
> -David
> 
>> On Jan 11, 2026, at 2:43 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> I’ll try to take a look tomorrow. I’d be surprised if there was a bug with
>> this.
>> 
>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 10:39 AM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> There is an open PR related to EJB3:
>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/2408
>>> Can someone with some XP in that area have a look at it ? Might be
>>> relevant for 10.x / 11.x
>>> 
>>> Gruß
>>> Richard
>