Mark, I skim over JSR-299 specification, and it supports two style of injection . As it states in 3.5 via ResourceBean and direct injection of resources that are defined within Java EE specification.
Section 7.3.6 explains lifecycle of the resources. And it states that if you inject resources with @Inject annotation for example, "@Inject EntityManager ", container does not inject entity manager instance directly, it must inject proxy instance (created from ResourceBean#create method). But same section last paragraph says that "The container must perform ordinary Java EE component injections (without @Injection)". Therefore I will update our resource handling this afternoon with supporting 1* @Inject @Qualifier *EntityManager manger 2* @PersistenceContext EntitityManager manager; In first situation, OWB injects proxy for the resource, however in second case it directly inject resource that is get from Resource Plugin. I will work on those afternoon; Thanks; --Gurkan * 2010/2/16 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Hi Gurkan! > > It seems we have a different understanding on 3.5.1 and I beg you to stop > changing this parts until Gavin or Pete answers our question. We must get a > clear understanding on these points before releasing M4 at least! > > Imho 3.5.1 is only meant as an example and directly injecting > @PersistenceContext is still perfectly valid (as it was since the > beginning). > > If you remember, the original section explicitly stated that EXTENDED > EntityManagers must not be used. This got dropped to allow it's use in an SE > environment. The @Dependent soft-restriction (otherwise non portable > behaviour) is still a left over from this period, because this will only > work with JTA aware transactional EntityManagers, whereas for an extended > EntityManager, something like @RequestScoped is appropriate (otherwise our > Transactional logic would not work!) > > Writing something like > > private @Produces @PersistenceContext(unitName="reservation") > EntityManager entityManager; > > > > @Produces @RequestScoped > @org.apache.webbeans.reservation.bindings.EntityManagerQualifier > > public EntityManager createEntityManager() > > { > > return entityManager; > > } > > as we have now in the reservation example actually HAVE to result in an > AmbigousResolutionException. > 1st bean: the producer field with type EntityManager > 2nd bean: the producer method with type EntityManager > > I have not yet a final response from Gavin, but a pre-commitment that our > old behaviour was correct. > > Please let's discuss this in the afternoon and collect arguments pro/con > for both theories to jointly figure out which way we need to go in the end. > > txs and LieGrue, > strub > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz > gegen Massenmails. > http://mail.yahoo.com > -- Gurkan Erdogdu http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com
