Am I
the only one that think the following makes more sense?
EJBObject -> Local interface
RemoteEJBObject -> Remote interface
as
opposed to
EJBObject -> Remote interface
EJBLocalObject -> Local interface
Isn't
is the more natural state for an object to be local?
I am
glad the whole DO thing is gone. It made no good sense at
all.
Just
my 2C
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tim Drury
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 9:14 AM
To: Orion-Interest
Subject: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
Here is the section that says what is different between
PFD 1 and 2:
E.12 Proposed Final Draft 2
Introduced local interfaces and local home interfaces for entity beans and session beans.
Added characterization of local client view.
Added subclasses of EJBException for systems exceptions thrown from local interface methods.
Revisions to architecture for container managed persistence:
* Shifted container managed relationships among entity beans from remote interfaces to local
interfaces.
* Removed dependent object classes.
* Removed remote relationships among entity beans.
