Ales Justin wrote:
Is this name sytax already used, and such beans are already installed?
That syntax isn't being currently used and the MC beans being installed use some random internal naming scheme to deploy those MC beans.
Ales Justin wrote:
If yes, there is a bit of inconsistency in the naming, EJBBinderDeployer uses application instead of appName.
If not, I don't see who would provide these beans into MC.
We would require a change in the no-interface view and the singleton deployers. The reason I suggested that change was because to get the resource provider working, we do require some changes outside the resource provider and the simplest and quickly doable I could think of was that approach.
Ales Justin wrote:
And what is supposed to be 'bean' in this case (instead of blahblah)?
Each EJB bean has a jndi binder (MC bean). the "bean" in such a case would be the name of the EJB. so the no-interface view and singleton binder deployer would install binders for each EJB using that naming scheme.