[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: SFSB vs. JavaBean

[pete.muir@jboss.org]

"EricJava" wrote : Waitaminute, looking at the JBoss Seam book (an official JBoss publication), by Michael Yuan and Thomas Heute, on page 320:
  | 
  | anonymous wrote : However, Seam POJO components are stateful and have a conversational scope by default.
  | 
  | When you say "request scoped" maybe you mean "temporary conversation scoped"?

No, I mean request scoped. The book is wrong and I am right ;)

anonymous wrote : By default, JavaBeans are bound to the event context which is not the same as the request, or the conversation, or the temporary conversation. Event is stateless.

No. The Event scope is the length of the request. I'm quite bad at using the words Request an Event interchangeably for that scope. Event is NOT stateless like an @Stateless EJB3, the scope of the state is the request.

anonymous wrote :  "msystems" wrote:
  | Must be an error ! Seam POJO's are default EVENT (request) scoped and not conversation or temp. conversation scoped.
  | 
  | 
  | Indeed:
  | 
  | http://docs.jboss.org/seam/2.0.1.CR2/reference/en/html/concepts.html
  | 
  | Quote:
  | By default, JavaBeans are bound to the event context.
  | 
  | 
  | which is not the same as the request, or the conversation, or the temporary conversation. Event is stateless.
  | 
  | Reading on in the doc:
  | 
  | Quote:
  | However, they do not provide the functionality of a session bean (declarative transaction demarcation, declarative security , efficient clustered state replication, EJB 3.0 persistence, timeout methods, etc).
  | 
  | 
  | Is this correct? If I'm using a POJO and I put a @Restrict on it, that @Restrict is ignored? If that's the case, I probably can't use POJOs at all in my application, because nearly every operation is restricted.

Thats talking about EJB3 declarative security, not Seam Security. Seam security works equally well on EJB3s or Seam POJOs.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4123975#4123975

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4123975