Hi Robert, All,
Just to clear things up...
re: spreading lies
The question response on this thread was *not* posted by an employee of the
company. Most of the posts are made by customers of ours, who, like
*everybody* subscribed to this list - are *very* *passionate* about their
work, and we *all* have our favorite products. I'm not too sure what your on
about, and I could easily post some "lies" from your newsgroups. But I don't
think it will help anyone, certainly not this community as a whole which you
and me are a only part of. I cannot expect your employees to know everything
about our product and vice versa.
re: PRO.narrow()
If PRO.narrow() is part of the spec, then it is. We obviously didnt put it
in their by ourselves. The attitude that seems to be communicated from your
side is "PRO.narrow() is there but we don't like it, so dont use it" - I
hope this is not the case. FYI our Container worked without PRO.narrow() but
we force the use of it due to customer demand of being completely 1.1
compliant. I thought that the purpose of standards is so that we can achieve
interoperability. There seems to be a religious debate about this and
everytime that someone asks there are 2 sides, and an argument starts. It is
clearly an issue that needs resolving above this list and my or your
arguments on this list are not constructive or helpful to customers.
If forcing PRO.narrow means that more servers could be 1.1 compliant, then I
am all for it, as it means more products are standards based and our
platform J2EE will succeed.
To the people at Sun: can we put an FAQ about this issue on the EJB website?
To everyone else: when somebody asks the question about it, can we just
refer them to this FAQ.
Let's get on with discussing interesting J2EE and EJB topics, instead of
arguing about stuff like this. We are a community, not a parliament.
Kind Regards,
-Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Patrick
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 12:47 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PortableRemoteObject.narrow
Give me a break!
<vendor>
WebLogic does not require the use of PRO but it can certainly be used with
WebLogic -- go grab the class, stick it in your weblogic classpath, and use
it (if someone wants me to send it to them, please send me email
privately). Of course, it will be a no-op but if this makes you feel
better about your EJB compliance then, by all means, please use it. PRO is
being distributed with WebLogic 5.1 (look in the rmi-iiop11.jar or
rmi-iiop12.jar files).
</vendor>
IAS 4.0 seems to be a reasonable product but it really makes me wonder when
they start spreading lies about other vendor's products. Why not just
focus on the features, performance, and scalability of your own product
rather than resort to vendor bashing?
Just my two cents,
Robert
At 07:08 AM 3/16/00 +0200, you wrote:
><vendor>
> Take a look at the Inprise's newsgroup for a discussion on this
>issue and what it means : www.borland.com/newsgroups
>
>See the thread named :
>No portableRemoteObject narrow in weblogic from 07.03.00
>
></vendor>
>
>
>
> > Hi all,
> > I am getting as to how the PortableRemoteObject.narrow helps when
compared
> > to the simple cntxt.lookup!!!. The code is given below
> > Object objref = ctx.lookup("pool.Register");
> > RegisterHome registerhome =
> > (RegisterHome)PortableRemoteObject.narrow(objref,
> > connectpool.RegisterHome.class);
> > compared to
> > RegisterHome registerhome = (RegisterHome) ctx.lookup("pool.Register");
> > Hey, to me it seems the 1st one increases the # of lines of code!!!! but
> > what values does it add???
> > Any help to clear this doubt is appreciated.
> > TIA
> > Anamitra
> >
> >
> >
> >
>===========================================================================
> > 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".
> >
> >
>
>===========================================================================
>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".
===========================================================================
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".
===========================================================================
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".
