I guess that could workits extremely undesireable, but technically
feasible. It would be rather unpleasent to look up ever independent
attribute as a seperate JNDI lookup and forcibly inject it. For the
moment dealing with the drawbacks of XMBeans and the integration
issues is less unpl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having the dependency information will make things work a lot more
smoothly for us, we will still not be able to use service beans
without at least deploytime dependency injection. We will have to
continue to kludge around these holes in the near future but one day
Having the dependency information will make things work a lot more
smoothly for us, we will still not be able to use service beans
without at least deploytime dependency injection. We will have to
continue to kludge around these holes in the near future but one day
5.0 will fix all of our prob
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Burke wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. @Tx tags can only be used on classes but not interfaces (in the case
of MBeans)
a. reason this would be handled by the MBean deployer adding a
transaction interceptor rather than AOP proper.
b. there is no fram
Bill Burke wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. @Tx tags can only be used on classes but not interfaces (in the case
of MBeans)
a. reason this would be handled by the MBean deployer adding a
transaction interceptor rather than AOP proper.
b. there is no framework within jboss for XMBean
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. @Tx tags can only be used on classes but not interfaces (in the case
of MBeans)
a. reason this would be handled by the MBean deployer adding a
transaction interceptor rather than AOP proper.
b. there is no framework within jboss for XMBeans using attribute
ta
1. @Tx tags can only be used on classes but not interfaces (in the case
of MBeans)
a. reason this would be handled by the MBean deployer adding a
transaction interceptor rather than AOP proper.
b. there is no framework within jboss for XMBeans using attribute
tags to specify interception
