> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Victor Langelo > I'm afraid you're taking my statement out of context. I was asking this in the > specific case where one ejb-jar file has a required container managed > relationship to a bean in another ejb-jar file. In that case, you > don't have the option of deploying the jars independently. Correct. And that's by design. I would be interested in hearing a good reason for wanting two EJB's connected by a relationship but deployed in different jars, though... This strikes me as a very fragile design. -- Cedric =========================================================================== 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".
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Kenneth D. Litwak
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Cedric Beust
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Victor Langelo
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with no... Robert Krüger
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Mark Hapner
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with no... Robert Krüger
- EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Eunum Listener
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Juan Lorandi (Chile)
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Victor Langelo
- EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Cedric Beust
- EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Juan Lorandi (Chile)
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Juan Lorandi (Chile)
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with no... Victor Langelo
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Victor Langelo
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with now Juan Lorandi (Chile)
- Re: EJB 2.0 final - what we have to live with no... Victor Langelo