Hey
Ed Roman wrote:
> IMHO, we need to make a decision: is mixing BMP and CMP allowed? If so, it
> should be stated in the EJB specification, and we need to thoroughly think
> about the right way of specifying how BMP and CMP should be toggled.
I'm not saying we should mix BMP and CMP. The SQL calls I referred to
was not intended for state mgmt. For state mgmt you should choose either
or. I just meant that in bean methods you are allowed to do whatever,
including SQL-calls. Now, in the end I think that databases are just
another external resource, and external resources will be available with
the Connector API. Should it be allowed to call legacy systems but not
databases? Makes no sense to me.
But of course you have to be aware of the implications, as you note.
Nothing new there. There's no such thing as free lunch.
> And if you want my personal opinion, I don't believe there should be two
> types of entity beans. I think it confuses people and makes the EJB
> programming model too complex (compared to COM+). I believe there should be
> one type of entity bean. You should specify deployment descriptor settings
> that toggle BMP/CMP on a per-method level. This will simplify the EJB
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You meant per-variable level right? Having BMP/CMP decided on method
level does not make sense.
/Rickard
===========================================================================
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".
