You mean "no" as in "no opposition", right? :-)
Carlo
On 03/14/2012 07:07 PM, Marina Vatkina wrote:
> Experts,
>
> I'd like to close on this item. If I don't get any supporting replies
> soon, I would treat it as a no.
>
> thanks,
> -marina
>
> Carlo de Wolf wrote:
>> Right now it is possible to define additional JNDI bindings via @EJB
>> on the bean class. The bean developer is required however to make the
>> reference fully resolvable.
>>
>> @Stateless
>> @Local (Echo.class)
>> @EJB(name = "java:global/Additional", beanName = "SampleSLSB",
>> beanInterface = Echo.class)
>> public class SampleSLSB implements Echo {
>> }
>>
>> It would be nice if the default bean referenced in a class level @EJB
>> would be the current bean. Furthermore if only 1 bean interface is
>> exposed, just reference that one.
>>
>> @Stateless
>> @Local (Echo.class)
>> @EJB(name = "java:global/Additional")
>> public class SampleSLSB implements Echo {
>> }
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Carlo