Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread danch
Rickard Oberg wrote: > Bill Burke wrote: > >> Nope. I guess when you come from the CORBA world to EJB, everything >> looks >> powerful. The packaging, (jars, wars, ears, and with jboss, sars) is >> just >> not available in the CORBA world. That's what its all about man. >> Packaging, inte

Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread Rickard Oberg
Bill Burke wrote: > Nope. I guess when you come from the CORBA world to EJB, everything looks > powerful. The packaging, (jars, wars, ears, and with jboss, sars) is just > not available in the CORBA world. That's what its all about man. > Packaging, integration, configuration, and deployment.

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread Bill Burke
lopment@Lists. Sourceforge. Net > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB > > > can'tturn off the freaking email. > > |The real power > |of EJB is in the packaging and deployment. > > you on dope? > > marcf > | > |Bill > | &g

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread Bill Burke
> -Original Message- > From: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 1:11 PM > To: Bill Burke; Rickard Öberg > Cc: Jboss-Development@Lists. Sourceforge. Net > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB > > > can'ttu

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread marc fleury
can'tturn off the freaking email. |The real power |of EJB is in the packaging and deployment. you on dope? marcf | |Bill | | ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread Bill Burke
Sorry to chime in so late, but I have a few comments... Firstly, from Rickard. > I intend to write a whitey on it some day too, but basically it goes > something like this: > * Meta-programming is good, but not inherent to EJB > * The EJB programming model in general is flawed. (See EJB-INTEREST

Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread Rickard Öberg
marc fleury wrote: > |What an utterly stupid remark. > > Laaa laa la laa laaa laa ! > > ( I am not listening ) Hehe.. you're so screwed... awhh.. why do I even bother.. :-) > |Because..? > |1) Bean A uses bean B. B dies, but C that implements the same interface > |is still alive. Now what's

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread marc fleury
|Hehe.. you're so screwed... awhh.. why do I even bother.. :-) As much as I really love to argue with you I really want to work on RH and put it out, but these discussions are down the road, really I extend the invitation again, I will try to get you to come to one of the trainings. |Alright, y

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread marc fleury
|What an utterly stupid remark. Laaa laa la laa laaa laa ! ( I am not listening ) |What I meant was: MP is good, EJB has it, but it's not the only way to |get MP. La! la ! la! la! la! la! |> could it be because "experts" are donkey-dick-sucking-monkeys that don't |> know their ass from their

Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread Rickard Öberg
marc fleury wrote: > |I intend to write a whitey on it some day too, but basically it goes > |something like this: > |* Meta-programming is good, but not inherent to EJB > > true, but a sophism > > "You are intelligent, but intelligence is not inherent to Rickard Oberg (I > am intelligent as we

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-15 Thread marc fleury
|I intend to write a whitey on it some day too, but basically it goes |something like this: |* Meta-programming is good, but not inherent to EJB true, but a sophism "You are intelligent, but intelligence is not inherent to Rickard Oberg (I am intelligent as well), does that make Rickard Oberg du

Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-14 Thread Rickard Öberg
marc fleury wrote: > we agree on the metaprogramming, we are going to make it dynamic too, > > some other day I will publish a white paper :) Let Rickard fire first I intend to write a whitey on it some day too, but basically it goes something like this: * Meta-programming is good, but not in

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-14 Thread Dain Sundstrom
I couldn't agree more. When I first started reading the code, It was hard to sperate the EJB sepecific stuff from the rest. I think this will help up out alot. -dain > -Original Message- > From: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 11:21 AM > To: J

RE: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-14 Thread marc fleury
|Amen. | |FWIW, I think the major advantage of the EJB framework over e.g. using JDO |is that, especially in the jboss environment, it is very simple to do |(limited) meta-class programming. The EJB spec uses this for transactions |and security, Scott uses it for Security Proxies, I have used it t

Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-14 Thread David Jencks
Amen. FWIW, I think the major advantage of the EJB framework over e.g. using JDO is that, especially in the jboss environment, it is very simple to do (limited) meta-class programming. The EJB spec uses this for transactions and security, Scott uses it for Security Proxies, I have used it to appl

Re: [JBoss-dev] Separating JMX/EJB

2001-11-14 Thread Scott M Stark
Definitely. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jboss-Development@Lists. Sourceforge. Net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:21 AM S