"In another related thread, BEA's comments on dependent objects and the
problems (or impossibility) of implementing them correctly have been
discussed. (If it's so hard or even impossible to implement the PFD1 CMP,
how come that several implementations exist?) To me, it looks like BEA and
perhaps other vendors have been able to convince the expert group that -
contrary to what I and probably most expect - the route that is the easiest
for the vendors has been taken, instead of focussing on what developers of
the technology need."
I don't really see this comment as being very fair. The explanation as I
understood it from Tyler Jewell's article was that dependent objects would
confuse the developers and he elaborated that BEA offered similar
functionality in 6.0. I would find it a bit hard to believe that BEA would
be worrying about implementation difficulty with the size of their
engineering staff.
>From: Stefan Tilkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: EJB 2.0 Proposed Final Draft 2
>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 11:16:08 +0200
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
===========================================================================
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".
