[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-136) Assumption all @Stateful beans should be passivation capable

[Jozef Hartinger (Reopened) (JIRA)]

     [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-136?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Jozef Hartinger reopened CDI-136:
---------------------------------



Even though the change is applied in EDR1, there are still places in the Passivation section where session beans are treated differently than managed beans. For example:

{quote}As defined by the EJB specification, all stateful session beans are passivation capable. Stateless and singleton session beans are not passivation capable.{quote}

{quote}The container must guarantee that: all session beans are passivation capable dependencies{quote}


{quote}If a managed bean which declares a passivating scope:{quote}
vs
{quote}If a stateful session bean:{quote}


{quote}If a bean which declares a passivating scope type, or any stateful session bean, has a decorator or interceptor which is not a passivation capable dependency, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a deployment problem.{quote}

This should be fixed consistently.
                
> Assumption all @Stateful beans should be passivation capable
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CDI-136
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-136
>             Project: CDI Specification Issues
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Beans, Java EE integration
>    Affects Versions: 1.0
>            Reporter: David Blevins
>            Assignee: Pete Muir
>             Fix For: 1.1.EDR1
>
>
> Stateful session beans in transactions can't be passivated and shouldn't have passivation requirements either, like request scope.
> Stateful beans can be any scope.  They are the Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans of EJB.  It's too big of a brush to say that passivation is always required.  That's the part we need to fix.
> Stateful session beans that do passivate are pretty rare.  They should be assumed to be @NormalScope unless otherwise specified.
> The user should be able to say if they want passivation validation on their stateful bean and dependencies.
> We should at a minimum change the related language of the spec to be "For every bean which declares a passivating scope, and for every stateful session bean ***that requires passivation***, " and discuss how to determine that an SFSB requires passivation.
> From the EJB perspective this has always been a container detail, but we could have a rule in CDI that states the checks are not enforced unless the bean class explicitly implements java.io.Serializable.  Alternatively we could make a generic @PassivationScoped annotation for other architectures that have flexible scopes and support passivation concepts.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.jboss.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira