Mailing-List: contact dev-help@avalon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" <dev@avalon.apache.org>
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
Organization: Private
To: "Avalon Developers List" <dev@avalon.apache.org>
Subject: Re: JSR 77 and JSR 88 support in avalon
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 20:10:28 +0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
References: <brmq15$svs$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <brmq15$svs$1@sea.gmane.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200312162010.28296.niclas@hedhman.org>

On Tuesday 16 December 2003 19:24, Leo Simons wrote:
> IMHO, that is *many* steps back from what avalon provides.

+1

> (1) this is so ugly my eyes nearly pop! Why is the component (EJB)
> responsible for creation of the context? Why is there some custom naming
> protocol for navigating that context? Why does it need to know about
> remoting/homing? Why is it responsible for creating the local stub? Why
> does it need to worry about what domain it is in?

Because it is EJB! And EJB HAS a past in vastly worse container systems 
pre-dating Java, YHSHY (You haven't seen hell yet.)

> == Why not do this with avalon? ==

+1

> Several years and dozens of specifications later, the EJB landscape is
> still the horrible, messy, big ball of mud that is the cause of
> programmer nightmare throughout the world. EJB sucks, and JSR 77 is no
> different.

Pronto!

Niclas

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org