Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 34473 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2003 21:57:10 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Sep 2003 21:57:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 16985 invoked by uid 500); 10 Sep 2003 21:56:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-geronimo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 16938 invoked by uid 500); 10 Sep 2003 21:56:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 16925 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2003 21:56:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO public.coredevelopers.net) (209.233.18.245) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Sep 2003 21:56:48 -0000 Received: from tiger (gateway [192.168.2.253]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by public.coredevelopers.net (Postfix on SuSE Linux 8.0 (i386)) with ESMTP id 5880E1CACF for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:49:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeremy Boynes" To: Subject: RE: [XML][Deployment]POJO design? Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:56:55 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3F5EADBE.3030301@mortbay.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > From: Gmane Remailer [mailto:public@main.gmane.org]On Behalf Of Greg > Wilkins > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 9:51 PM > To: public-geronimo-dev=d1GL8uUpDdXTxqt0kkDzDmD2FQJk+8+b@ciao.gmane.org >>>>>>>>>>>> Greg, please can you fix your mailer. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > Anyway - I'm almost ready with my own patch - so we can compare > and contrast > that with yours in a few hours > 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. 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