Hi!
Peter Michael wrote:
> > The container is responsible to listen for events for this
> > pasivated bean and
> > activate the bean if necessary
> >
> > regards bernd
>
> But this is not in current EJB 1.1 spec. Or did I miss some-
> thing? I think there are only about five lines about JMS
> in the current spec. Thus, the behavoir is undefined and
> not guaranteed to work with different EJB containers.
> (Even though containers should work the way that bernd
> described.)
EJB/JMS integration is unspecified, but nothing prevents you from making
a simple proxy that delegates incoming JMS messages to beans. And then
you would communicate with the bean through the EJBObject, which would
give the behaviour Bernd outlined (as the proxy is only
yet-another-client).
I haven't actually tested this approach :-), but I see no reason why it
wouldn't work. The only thing that is extra-spec is the setup of it,
i.e. there's no specification of how these proxies are registered as
listeners etc.
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
@home: +46 13 177937
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www-und.ida.liu.se/~ricob684
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
