[JCA/JBoss] - Re: ManagedConnectionFactory.setLogger
by iit
"vickyk" wrote : "iit" wrote : If I cannot disable it then it's a bug in JBoss because once a logger has been set
| I don't see anything going against JCA specs here , this can be as the feature request .
|
That's so typical JBoss'ish speech. You make a RA unusable by forcing it to produce huge log output and declare it as a feature request to remove that. That's so ignorant and impertinent, if you would tell that to one of my customers, you'd get fired before you'd end that sentence, be sure.
It reminds me on this case:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBAS-3343
Someone from your famous JBoss developers forgot to implement to configure RA properties. The only way to get over this is to crack a rar file, configure the values as defaults and recreate the rar. This was also not considered as a bug but as a feature request. We are waiting for a fix since June 2006!
The good thing is that there are viable alternatives to JBoss such as Glassfish which have a proven and working JCA implementation and very nice and responsive developers. It really doesn't matter whether you mark that as a bug or not. It only matters that it does not work. We all know that it takes months or even years until that get fixed. So we just move away from you.
Cheers,
Andreas
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4122962#4122962
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4122962
18 years, 5 months
[JBoss Seam] - Re: SFSB vs. JavaBean
by EricJava
"pete.muir(a)jboss.org" wrote : This is scope to the request scope by default - so it is stateful across the request but its *not* conversational.
|
| @Name("pojo")
| | class Pojo {}
Wait, I thought conversation scope was the default scope? It is for SFSBs, right? If I annotate my bean with @Name @Stateful, I get a conversation-scoped bean. If I put just @Name, it's a POJO, and you're saying it's request scoped?
This still doesn't fully answer the question. Most things can be done with POJOs. For example most beans aren't message-driven. For many simple things there is no performance benefit to clustering beans. So, should we be using EJBs or POJOs? POJOs have a benefit of simplicity: no need to write an interface.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4122961#4122961
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4122961
18 years, 5 months