So I think we are kind of caught in a catch 22 here...

The issue is, the server is pluggable for the most part.  People may/may
not want EJB, but definitely want the management capabilities.

Whats your thought on an adapter interface that provides for full JSR-77
compatibility, thus requiring EJB, or a switch that allows for pure JMX
remoting?  This would allow for compliance or be able to leverage the
management without EJB if so desired.

Thoughts?

Viet Nguyen wrote:
> Yes, with the current implementation we have, OpenEJB is a
> prerequisite. JMX is a good solution too, but I wanted to follow the
> JSR 77 spec, which tells us to communicate with the server through the
> usage of MEJB, which is why OpenEJB is needed in this case.
> 
> --Viet

Reply via email to