Dan OConnor wrote:
>
> On 19 May 00, at 18:01, Oleg Nitz wrote:
>
> > Dan OConnor wrote:
> > DO> Of course, SOMEHOW that reference must be matched up to an
> > DO> actual bean. Agreed? Apart from an ejb-link or a proprietary
> > DO> method, what is left? I can see only one other alternative from the
> > DO> information in the deployment descriptor reference: the home and
> > DO> remote classes. But this is not sufficient, because multiple beans
> > DO> with the same home and remote classes may be deployed in the
> > DO> same application (with differenent names and perhaps different
> > DO> environment entries).
> >
> > DO> So what is left? My belief is that either the ejb-link mechanism
> > DO> must be used, or the reference must be bound to a bean using a
> > DO> proprietary method. I don't see any other way.
> > What about ejb-ref-name?
> > This is the name of the referenced bean that is known to the Bean
> > Provider. I think that is most cases the Bean Provider knows the right
> > ejb-name of the referenced bean. The ejb-link mechanism should be used
> > by Application Assembler only if the ejb-ref-name is wrong
> > (e.g., the referenced Bean was renamed, or it was obtained from
> > other department).
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Oleg
>
> Hi Oleg,
>
> I see what you are saying. Of course, if the recommendations of
> the spec are followed, the ejb-ref-name will never match the
> referenced bean name exactly... because one will be XXX, and one
> will be ejb/XXX.
>
> But we could have an option that trimmed the "ejb" off the name
> and tried to find a matching bean. This is spec-compliant, because
> it falls under the case of "proprietary deployment tool." :-)
And is exactly what the EJX GUI will do if you add a reference to
ejb/XXX (trim off ejb/ and fill in the rest).
> 1. ejb-link, because we are mandated to respect this information
> at deployment time by the spec.
>
> 2. Any information in jBoss-specific deployment descriptors. (This
> is Rickard's "proprietary method," and should be checked second
> to give the bean deployer the opportunity to override the information
> programmed in the bean.)
Correct so far.
> 3. The ejb-ref-name, both trimmed and untrimmed (since putting it
> in the "ejb" context is a recommendation, not a mandate, of the
> spec.) I think we should call this the "Oleg default." :-)
IMHO unnecessary, since this procedure is done to fill in the info for
the 1. case by the GUI. And it is counter to the spec (14.3.4).
> Count me in, unless somene has a compelling argument against it.
The idea is good, but only in the XML editing phase, not in the
deployment phase.
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
@home: +46 13 177937
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.telkel.com
http://www.jboss.org
http://www.dreambean.com
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
