Alan Greenspan wrote: > If so, it will be necessary for clients to have copies of the server Handle > implementation classes on their local classpath. This is because the base > java.io implementation of ObjectInputStream resolves classes using the > application class loader hierarchy. > > This restriction seems neither practical nor desirable. I see no other > requirements placed on EJB clients to have local copies of server > implementation classes. If this is required, it will involve some server > specific client deployment mechanism. Clients using a variety of servers > will need to keep a repository of all the Handle implementations provided by > the various vendors. Seems bad and works against world wide EJB deployment > and ease of use. > What about the proxies for the bean homes and for the beans themselves? I have worked with several EJB servers, and they all require a fairly large set of server-specific classes deployed on the client. I don't think that server-neutral deployment of the client code is actually a goal of EJB.
begin:vcard n:Wilson;Chip tel;fax:(214) 358-0353 tel;work:(214) 642-4559 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.axyssolutions.com/ org:Axys Solutions adr:;;;Dallas;TX;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Application Architect note:Sun Certified Java Architect x-mozilla-cpt:;-25088 fn:Chip Wilson end:vcard
