[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-786

[bdecoste]

The suggestion of forcing ejb3 beans that need to be accessible to ejb2.1 clients to have their interfaces implement EJBObject makes sense, especially since we already force them to specify a home interface. But as Carlo points out, this would cause TCK problems.

We can't remove the EJBObject implementation completely as that would break ejb2.1 clients who cast to EJBObject. 

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4090424#4090424

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4090424