hmm, this always has been an issue for me since CDI shouldnt know about
these methods at all so how could it specify anything? That said not being
able to fix it in EJB spec I tend to agree with Tomas.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <
Hi,
I agree. Shouldn't we specify what happens in opposite case? Or maybe
better to update following in "10.4.2. Declaring an observer method" as
well:
"If a non-static method of a session bean class has a parameter annotated
@Observes, and the method is not a business method of the EJB, the
container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition
error."
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Antoine Sabot-Durand" <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
To: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 3:25:40 PM
Subject: [cdi-dev] Inconsistency in the spec regarding remote EJBs
Hi guys,
Bill Shanon, just pointed me to this test in TCK:
https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi-tck/blob/1.2/impl/src/main/java/org/jboss...
It tests the following assertion:
"If the bean is a session bean, the observer method must be either a
business method of the EJB or a static method of the bean class.”
The EJB containing the observers for the test is:
https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi-tck/blob/1.2/impl/src/main/java/org/jboss...
The EJB contains one business method coming from a local interface, one
from a remote and one static method. the 3 are observers methods
The test expects that the remote business observer method should be called.
Here we have an inconsistency IMO. By doing this we are violating rules
the CDI spec regarding the fact that remote EJBs are not CDI beans. And we
are calling this remote business method passing the event payload by
reference and not by value which violates EJB specification regarding
remote EJB.
I suggest that we change the assertion to:
If the bean is a session bean, the observer method must be either a local
business method of the EJB or a static method of the bean class.
and the TCK accordingly. Any thought ?
Antoine
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
intellectual property rights inherent in such information.