Hi David and Filippo On 12/7/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Filippo Diotalevi wrote: > Now I notice that openejb uses different types of JndiNameStrategy to > assign names to deployed ejbs, so that my ejb, whose remote interface > is org.acme.Calculator, becomes CalculatorBusinessRemote bean on JNDI. > Is this behaviour correct? > > With Glassfish, the ejb takes the simple name of its business > interface, but I didn't find a clear statement in the specification > about the correct naming of ejb... On this note, we can do whatever users think is most intuitive as global JNDI isn't a spec defined thing -- per spec even client apps are supposed to have a deployment descriptor and use ejb-ref and ejb- local-ref tags (ick). The strategy concept was plumbed in so we could support just about anything, we just don't yet have a mechanism for the user to say which strategy they want. I like the interface simple name approach. The only downside is that more than one bean can easily implement the interface. What kind of thoughts do you have? Any preferences?
I think we can use the approach specified in the specs of EJB3.0 "Core Contracts and Requirements", that we use the fully qualified name of the EJB followed by the name of the interface(s) it supports. For example if we have an EJB com.oejb3.examples.ExampleBean, and this EJB supports two biz interfaces, so we can have two JNDI names as follows for each biz interface, *java:comp/env/com.oejb3.examples.ExampleBean/BizIntfcOne* and *java:comp/env/com.oejb3.examples.ExampleBean/BizIntfcTwo*. Thoughts ??? -David
-- Thanks - Mohammad Nour
