geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <>
Subject RE: [XML][Deployment]POJO design?
Date Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:04:51 GMT
	So far, there doesn't seem to be a conclusive answer -- Greg and I 
have two proposals on the table, and I think Jeremy's the only one who's 
looked at the code for both, and he didn't like either.  I tried to 
address his concerns (see below), but if anyone else wants to take a look 
and chip in, that would be great.

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> I had a quick look over the two solutions and have concerns with both.
> Aaron's seems like a much smaller fix and I am not sure it addresses all the
> issues that people have brought up on this thread. If I read it correctly,
> it requires everyone using the geronimo model to cast the results of methods
> inherited from the spec model (e.g. (geronimo.EJBRef) getEJBRef() ). This
> could quickly become a PITA.

	FWIW, I updated the patch so the Geronimo POJOs do the casts for 
you.  Also, I think one of the JSR-88 classes failed to compile against 
the patch, so a revision is included with the new patch.  This is the 
"geronimo-ejb2.patch" file on the GERONIMO-76 issue.  If there are other 
issues (besides the cast) that need to be addressed, let me know.


> Greg's is much larger, but I have reservations about the actual data model.
> For example, EJB extends JNDINameable but MDB's do not have a JNDI binding.
> I am also confused about the meaning of JNDINameable as both EJB and EJBRef
> are subclasses but the jndi-name element has very different meaning between
> them.
> We also seemed to have lost the JNDIEnvironmentRefs interface used by
> ComponentContextBuilder so (and I admit I have not tested it) I am curious
> about how it works.
> --
> Jeremy

View raw message