[webbeans-dev] Re: Terminology

Again, allow me to clarify some of the issues by starting a discussion that is at the heart of this concern. Hopefully this will help people understand more about where we are coming from. One of the biggest concerns around JSR 299 is that it promotes yet another component model in addition to EJB. This is *highly* undesirable, in fact it is a very dangerous thing for the platform. A lot of time and effort has been put into making EJB a competitive component model so that it can stack up to any other component model out there. If EJB has not reached this state then it is a failing of EJB, and means that EJB should be fixed and/or modified so that it provides whatever kind of component that people need or want. It does not warrant adding yet another way to develop business logic components and then adding the functionality that may already be, or should be, in the existing component model. So, with this issue as a backdrop, I think there are two things that this spec can do to ensure that the platform is not fractured or schitzophrenic in certain areas: 1) We have to ensure that this spec makes use of existing component models, modifying the existing component model when necessary, and adding new features to the model when required. Note that this correlates exactly with what this spec originally had as its mandate -- to integrate existing JSF and EJB components. 2) Ensure that people understand what this spec is, what it is offering, and what problems it is trying to solve. One thing that has become abundantly clear is that when people read the term "web beans" they think of it as being a second/third type of enterprise bean. This is only natural, but can be easily avoided by changing the name to be more in line with the value that this spec has, and the domain in which it resides. So, we are really talking about more than just a name change, but a name change is certainly a good start!