Hi Jesper
On Thursday 14 March 2013 11:03 PM, Sivakumar Thyagarajan wrote:
...
>>>> We should mandate that the returned Class<?> is the actual endpoint,
>>>> and
>>>> not the proxy. And that its ClassLoader has visibility to the needed
>>>> class definitions.
>>>
>>> The current proposed javadoc clarifies that the class to be returned
>>> from MEF.getEndpointClass() is the class corresponding to the Message
>>> Endpoint class. Is that sufficient?
>>>
>>
>> Well, that is the question. The JavaDoc is likely enough, but it should
>> probably be expanded in the spec text.
>
> The EJB (MDB) spec would describe in detail the requirements around the
> proxy that implements the message listener interface and all message
> listener methods of the bean. The
> MessageEndpointFactory.getEndpointClass method would just have the
> current proposed javadoc.
>
To add to the above response, the following changes in latest EJB 3.2
PFD [1] are the relevant updates for this feature.
- Under 5.4 Protocol Between a Message-Driven Bean Instance and its
Container
5.4.3 Message-Driven Bean with No-Methods Listener Interface
- Under 5.6 The Responsibilities of the Bean Provider
5.6.5 Message-Driven Bean with No-Methods Listener Interface
- Under 5.7 The Responsibilities of the Container Provider
5.7.2 Deployment of Message-Driven Beans with No-Methods
Listener Interface
Does this help?
Thanks
--Siva.
[1]
http://java.net/projects/ejb-spec/downloads/download/ejb-3_2-core-pfd.pdf