Appendix E Revision History - E12 Proposed Final Draft 2
--- Alex Paransky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is outI read the spec, and still saw the
> Dependent Objects in there. Where does it say that the DOs are gone?
>
> -AP_
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Russ White
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 9:53 AM
> To: Orion-Interest
> Subject: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
>
>
> 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.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
