Scott Stark wrote:
> > What about an approach whereby both war and ejb deployers
> always try the
> > jndi-name first, and if there is none specificied, or if the jndi-name
> > is not bound, or if the jndi-name is bound to the wrong home class, we
> > fallback to the ejb-link name? That wouldn't require any extra config
> > switches and would cover the situation where beans in existing
> > deployments have specified both and the jndi-name is wrong.
> >
> >
> I would say the opposite behavior should be the default since if
> there is an
> ejb-link
> it must be resolvable in the scope of the current deployment
> while a jndi-name
> cannot in general be resolved since this can refer to an external
> server that
> need not even be available during deployment. Therefore, use the
> ejb-link first,
> and if none is specified, use the jndi-name. To maintain the
> current behavior
> add a flag to the war deployer which treats failures to resolve
> ejb-links as
> deployment errors. This would be false by default in which case a
> failure to
> resolve an ejb-link triggers fallback to the use of the jndi-name.
>
I disagee with the last bit here. If ejb-link is specified and the target
EJB does not exist in the current deployment, then it should definitely be a
deployment error as the standard descriptor was mis-assembled. Any flag
should be to turn this behaviour off and allow a mis-configured deployment
to drop through to the [local-]jndi-name; this should apply to the EJB
deployer as well for consistency.
If no ejb-link is specified, then a [local-]jndi-name must be specified. If
it is not, then it's a deployment error (as it is now for EJBs and should be
for WARs) as there is no sensible default (well, maybe the ejb-ref-name less
any "ejb/").
> >>
> >> ejb-local-refs are only intended for ejbs in the same deployment
> >> so ejb-link should suffice, but the spec is not very explicit.
> >> The way jboss works, this won't be a problem.
> >> It should not break any existing deployments.
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean - do you mean that you are or
> > aren't in favour of making the handling consistent, and therefore
> > introducing the ejb-local-ref element?
> >
>
> There is no need for an ejb-local-ref in the JBoss specific descriptors as
> the ejb-link element handles this in the standard descriptor.
> There is no reason
> why the metadata needs to be expanded to allow for specifying the
> local home
> jndi name.
>
There is, because ejb-link is optional:
<!ELEMENT ejb-local-ref
(description?, ejb-ref-name, ejb-ref-type,
local-home, local, ejb-link?)>
^
------------------------------|
and if it's not there you need to be able to specify the target's
local-jndi-name.
Jeremy
/*************************
* Jeremy Boynes
* Partner
* Core Developers Network
*************************/
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
