Hi Arash! Currently the spec imho only says that the Manager has to be exposed via JNDI.
I personally don't see the benefit if we add all things to JNDI but I'm not a big EJB wizard. Why do you like to have it? Can you give us a sample where it would be an advantage? txs and LieGrue, strub --- Arash Rajaeeyan <[email protected]> schrieb am Fr, 13.3.2009: > Von: Arash Rajaeeyan <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: @Resource handling > An: [email protected] > Datum: Freitag, 13. März 2009, 10:03 > can we assume ordinary java objects > also have a place on JNDI tree? > just as EJB 3.1 components names have become standard? > that's some thing we can propose to be added web-beans > (Java Dependency > Injection) standard. > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Matthias Wessendorf > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > The (EJB centric) Spec of @Resource says that the > resource will always be > > looked up via JNDI [1]. I guess mainly because the > whole J2EE stuff is > > really JNDI centric. > > > > > > Otoh in environments where no or only a read-only > JNDI context is > > available, do we like to allow @Resouce also? > > > > I think, that I'd go for it > > > > -M > > > > > I know this feature from Spring and I must say I > love it. You can simply > > write a Bean and inject it via @Resource even without > JNDI, So for Spring > > @Resource is > more or less an alias for @Autowired > (which is ~ our > > @Current) > > > > > > I'm not really sure how to interpret the section > 5.12.1 of the spec. > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > [1] http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/javax/annotation/Resource.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > > > > > -- > Arash Rajaeeyan >
