Hi Mark,
correct me if I am wrong. as 2009-01-22 the new name for web-beans is "Java Contexts and Dependency Injection" JNDI is a mechanism for naming and discovery of Java Objects in a distributed system. it lets components (complex heavy objects) to be discovered with a mechanism other than their Java Class name or Java Object pointer. since lots of systems are not distributed and run on single JVM, that distributed java objects parts makes no sense. but: in DI frameworks like Seam and Spring a component can be given an alias name other than it's class name. now if a developer wants to move from SE to EE (for example he may use SE for unit test, and EE for deployment, or current project size may not justify EE environment) changing the names may become painful if they need to be changed. if some naming mechanism compatible with EJB 3.1 JNDI names are used, it may help this change. putting objects in JNDI directory is not neccessary, but a a place for them on JNDI tree, (when program is deployed in EE) may be very usefull. Regards Arash Rajaeeyan On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > > Hi Arash! > > Currently the spec imho only says that the Manager has to be exposed via > JNDI. > > I personally don't see the benefit if we add all things to JNDI but I'm not > a big EJB wizard. Why do you like to have it? Can you give us a sample where > it would be an advantage? > > txs and LieGrue, > strub > > --- Arash Rajaeeyan <arash.rajaee...@gmail.com> schrieb am Fr, 13.3.2009: > > > Von: Arash Rajaeeyan <arash.rajaee...@gmail.com> > > Betreff: Re: @Resource handling > > An: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Datum: Freitag, 13. März 2009, 10:03 > > can we assume ordinary java objects > > also have a place on JNDI tree? > > just as EJB 3.1 components names have become standard? > > that's some thing we can propose to be added web-beans > > (Java Dependency > > Injection) standard. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Matthias Wessendorf > > <mat...@apache.org>wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > The (EJB centric) Spec of @Resource says that the > > resource will always be > > > looked up via JNDI [1]. I guess mainly because the > > whole J2EE stuff is > > > really JNDI centric. > > > > > > > > Otoh in environments where no or only a read-only > > JNDI context is > > > available, do we like to allow @Resouce also? > > > > > > I think, that I'd go for it > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > I know this feature from Spring and I must say I > > love it. You can simply > > > write a Bean and inject it via @Resource even without > > JNDI, So for Spring > > > @Resource is > more or less an alias for @Autowired > > (which is ~ our > > > @Current) > > > > > > > > I'm not really sure how to interpret the section > > 5.12.1 of the spec. > > > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > > strub > > > > > > > > [1] > http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/javax/annotation/Resource.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Arash Rajaeeyan > > > > > > -- Arash Rajaeeyan
