Anyway,
If you have a strongly distributed architecture with several application
servers you already have to use the properties mechanism to be able to
distinguish the different application servers. The same applies if you
connect to one application server from within another one.
I don't think Java EE 5 solves that problem. Or maybe we could solve
this by playing with the class loader (but does that simplify things,
rather not).
Christof
Takashi Nishigaya wrote:
> Thanks, Ian.
>
> Yes, Java Web Start may be a good choice for portability.
> I will evaluate it.
>
> Thanks,
> Takashi Nishigaya
>
> Ian Evans wrote:
>> Takashi Nishigaya <Takashi.Nishigaya_at_Sun.COM> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for your valuable sugestions.
>>> Yes, @EJB is really good feature in Java EE 5.
>>> Maybe it is time to use the client container.
>>>
>>> But for portability issue, different vendor provides the different
>>> command usage for client container. It raises another issue about
>>> packaging of the portable ejb client application, i.e.,
>>>
>>> which is protable? properties + classpath vs. wrapping command line
>>
>>
>> Glassfish/App Server 9 uses Java Web Start to simplify packaging and
>> running Java EE App Clients. It's the best solution for running
>> remote app clients.
>>
>> http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/quinn?entry=how_does_glassfish_know_about
>>
>> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-3659/6n5s6m5aa?a=view
>>
>> I don't think we've done enough to promote app client use generally
>> or to publicize our Java Web Start-able app client feature.
>>
>> -ian
>