jsr345-experts@ejb-spec.java.net

[jsr345-experts] Re: XXX Unclear what “common bean state” means.

From: Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 17:15:08 -0700

State is retained if the bean instance is pooled, right?

May be we should reword the "references to the XXX state ... returned
through multiple local interface method calls"?

thanks,
-marina

Carlo de Wolf wrote:
> 4.7 Stateless Session Beans
>
> A common misconception with beginning EJB users is that Stateless
> Session Beans are not considered stateful POJOs, while in actuality
> state is retained. Maybe we should call it 'retained bean state'
> instead of 'common bean state'.
>
> Carlo
>
> On 07/06/2011 01:02 AM, Marina Vatkina wrote:
>> Dear Experts,
>>
>> Before we go any further on the discussions of the spec improvements,
>> we need to close on several issues with the current version:
>>
>> 1. Vote on the optionality of the Entity Beans and JAX-RPC based Web
>> Service Endpoints (and the split of the spec into 2 parts, but the
>> split is the secondary issue). I have only 3 votes (positive) so far.
>>
>> 2. Close on the items marked by Linda as XXX in the drafts.
>>
>> 3. Define *deterministic* rules in the EJB spec about EJB Lite vs.
>> EJB Full list of features in regards to the EJB support in a Web
>> Profile container. In addition to be very flexible (contrary to the
>> regular Java EE approach, and the expectations of the EJB TCK), the
>> current wording in the spec does not make it clear a) what is
>> expected and what is not in the Web Profile, and b) if we keep it
>> flexible, how a user (at deployment and/or runtime) can determine if
>> a specific feature outside EJB Lite is available/supported.
>>
>> The same applies to the Embeddable EJB Container.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> -marina
>>
>>
>