On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 20:15, George Gastaldi <gegastaldi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Nice, I agree that it is the right way to go. I was almost
separating that on a separate module also.
However it must be considered that JTA would not always be used (when
running on tomcat for example). How would this module handle these scenarios
? Would it depend on persistence module itself ?
The Seam transaction API is an abstraction over JTA. It provides the same
interface, but can accommodate a different providers underneath.
For instance, you should be able to adapt it to any single resource
transaction (recognizing that you lose multiple resource enlistment)
(similar to what spring does:
). The module could even go
a step further and provide simplified transaction configuration for JTA in a
standalone environment. I think there is a lot of interesting avenues to
explore, which is why having it in a separate module makes a ton of sense.
The floor is open for discussion.
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597