May 2008 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: etc or config?

by ataylor

ive standardised on config. I would do an svn update View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151319#4151319 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151319

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-1062 and metadata

by ALRubinger

"wolfc" wrote : The above example is invalid. An EJB 2.1 view can't have multiple remote/local interfaces. (As per quoted spec.) Whoops, bad example, should look like: @RemoteHome | public interface RemoteHome extends EJBHome{ | | public RemoteInterface create(); | | public RemoteInterface create(String whatever); | | } There may be only one "create" method for SLSB, but there may be any N "create" methods for SFSB. The logic attached in the issue should be good, even if my contrived example was bogus. I don't see why this invalidates JBMETA-41; still need to determine the remote/local interface from the return type(s) of the home. S, ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151277#4151277 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151277

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-1062 and metadata

by wolfc

The above example is invalid. An EJB 2.1 view can't have multiple remote/local interfaces. (As per quoted spec.) Note that the use of @Remote in EJBTHREE-1127 is liberal versus spec. In actuality @Remote should only be used to specify remote business interfaces. The remote interface is always inferred from the remote home. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151274#4151274 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151274

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-1062 and metadata

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

The annotation processing is run with the deployment class loader, so that logic can be added to the @RemoteHome annotation handler. http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMETA-41 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151234#4151234 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151234

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-1062 and metadata

by ALRubinger

Yes, this is one example of Spec-defined logic that I'd like performed by jboss-metadata (not a deployer responsible for populating JBossSessionMetadata). Another example is: @RemoteHome | public interface RemoteHome extends EJBHome{ | | public RemoteInterface1 create(); | | public RemoteInterface2 create2(); | | } The above example defines 2 EJB2.x Remote interfaces, even though they're not explicitly marked as such anywhere. That's EJBTHREE-1127, defined by: "EJB3 Core Specification 3.6.2.1" wrote : The return type of a create method on the remote home interface is the session bean's remote interface. Currently this is being handled (improperly?) by Proxy generation code. Metadata doesn't access the ClassLoader for the Container, so I don't see a way to handle this there now. Ideas? S, ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151223#4151223 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151223

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Classloading and versioning

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Another alternative would be for acme2 to declare a uses constraint | such that it could fall back to ales version 1 when required. Then everybody | would use ales version 1 with acme2's export of ales ignored. | | But that would fail in this example because it would still conflict on the scott package. OK, this makes sense, and it's more logical. But I still don't see why it would fail on scott? Or you're assuming scott package uses something from ales? Even if it would, why would that be a problem? Shouldn't there be a way to tell that in-bundle usage is a black box, and scott's usage of ales is impl detail. Would then there be a way to get runtime CCE if something ales's was exposed through scott and used in foobar? Or how do you detect this at deployment, exposing the possible conflict? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151221#4151221 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151221

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - EJBTHREE-1062 and metadata

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

So one problem I'm seeing with trying to extract the jndi names is due to the EJBTHREE-1062 issue where a single interface not annotated with @Remote is assumed to be @Local. Such a bean's metadata has no local interfaces defined. I guess the annotation processing needs to perform this mapping. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151220#4151220 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151220

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Classloading and versioning

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | If foo wants to use scott version 3 (provided by acme2) then it must also use | ales version 2 to be consistent. This then defeats the purpose of versioning, or at least that's how I see the real useful case. For me it's totally legit to have this example kind of configuration, in case you know that classes in ales and scott packages are never gonna exchange classes among each other. But you're saying this is not what OSGi considers legit? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151218#4151218 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151218

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Virtual File semantics exist in TomcatDeployment

by alesj

"anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : We have Virtual File semantics still existing in TomcatDeployment. There has been a new introduction of a concept of "UnifiedVirtualFile" from the webservices component just to make a serviceref to WS. What does this 'UVF' do? "anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : | At least the web services introduction seems wrong to me assuming that the tomcat usage of VFS semantics is a work in progress. What is the status of this work then? I don't seem to remember any post on this topis for a while now. Are we done with what Adrian describes here? - http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4150666#4150666 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151217#4151217 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151217

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: final releases for jboss-reflect/mdr

by alesj

I'll do some more tests tomorrow and over the weekend of the annotations scanning work that I've done, but I don't expect any issues, so I'm fine with releasing CR1 or even GA. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4151216#4151216 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4151216

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums May 2008