[weld-dev] persistence and transactions outside Java EE

[Dan Allen]

Sigh. I still feel like we are stuck. I'm hearing that we can either have
developers use EJB (lite or full Java EE) or they have to go find a
framework to have transactional beans. Maybe in the future this will be in
Java EE, but today we have to go about it our own way. And the divergence is
what bothers me.

If I had to sell this thing to an audience today, I would basically lobby
hard for the use of an EJB w/ EJB lite because the alternative sounds too
proprietary for me.

-Dan

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Reza Rahman <reza_rahman at lycos.com> wrote:

> Dan,
>
> I think the idea of using EJB "aspects" outside the component model is
> something Java EE will accommodate soon anyway. The solution for now
> should probably be implementing embeddable containers that way right
> now. In our case, we still use @TransactionAttribute, but maybe you guys
> could use @Transactional or something similar...
>
> Cheers,
> Reza
>
>
> Dan Allen wrote:
> > Yep, the spec states:
> >
> > 'In a Java EE implementation, a Managed Bean may use any of the
> > resource injection functionality laid out in Chapter 5 of the Java EE
> > Platform specification, “Resources, Naming and Injection“.'
> >
> > Hmm, but the trouble is, where does that leave Tomcat and Jetty? And
> > if the resource like the persistence context or UT is to be injected,
> > who is doing the injecting? Of course, if EJB lite were present, it
> > could handle it.
> >
> > So basically, what I'm getting at is that perhaps CDI can provide this
> > transaction and persistence support (maybe even the resource
> > injection) when the Java EE environment is not present (meaning EJB
> > lite is also absent).
> >
> > Of course, we can prototype this as a portable extension today. I'm
> > certainly not opposed to that. But I would hope if we did, the long
> > term goal would be to somehow provide this in Java EE lite.
> >
> > I understand this argument is circular, because eventually you arrive
> > back at the question "why not just make them use Java EE?" The idea is
> > to attract developers to Java EE by giving them one more stepping stone.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> > --
> > Dan Allen
> > Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
> > Registered Linux User #231597
> >
> > http://mojavelinux.com
> > http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> > http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
>
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>



-- 
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597

http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/weld-dev/attachments/20091124/4e2ba6f7/attachment.html