[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: When is there an EJBObject?

[ALRubinger]

I'm not sure the history of our goals in implementation, but taking from the perspective of an application developer:

Isn't the concept of "partially-realized" confusing?  An EJB2.1 view that's only callable from a EJB3.0 client?  Why?

An EJB should have the following possible views: EJB3.0, EJB2.1, or both, with nothing inbetween.  Anything half-defined should throw a descriptive Exception to the bean provider on deploy.

Propose the following:

* Close 1058 as invalid/not a bug
* Fix RemoteUnitTestCase.testEJBObject() to pass by changing org.jboss.ejb3.test.stateful.Stateful to extend EJBObject.
* Open a new issue, redefining the case outlined in 1058 but stipulating that the container should throw an exception on deploy.  Remote interface w/ no home is an incomplete 2.1 view.
* Open a new issue for the inverse: Home interface with no Remote interface is an incomplete 2.1 view.

Benefits here:

* We don't have to guess/infer what the intent of the bean provider was to expose
* We give clear failures on deployment as to why an EJB with partially-implemented 2.1 views to the bean provider.

Invite those with more experience w/ Spec interpretation to invalidate this argument.

S,
ALR

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4092280#4092280

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4092280