I use EJB3 along with the JBoss Seam framework and it suits all of my needs very well. I agree that it is a bit bloated for smaller apps, but it is easy to configure, powerful, and Seam includes an arsenal of front end JSF widgets bundled with the RichFaces project. Don't get me wrong, Spring works well also and I think it has it's place in the market as well...but I think EJB 3 is still very viable and a useful technology.
Josh Juneau On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Marcelo Morales <marcelomorales.name@ gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Rakesh <rakesh.mailgro...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > the minimal overhead of setting up Spring (and with annotations it > > really is just a few things) is worth it since even small apps become > > bigger apps. Retrofitting later would be a pain.... > > Agree. Spring is not heavyweight anymore. For example. on a webapp, > you need 5 lines on web.xml and 5 lines on a xml file named > applicationContext.xml to make spring work. Arguably, no more XML is > needed if you don't want to (although it may be easier to use more XML > configuration). Both JPA and JSF need more XML (persistence.xml and > faces-config.xml) to work minimally. > > -- > Marcelo Morales > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
