> I think I understand now. The only fuzzy part is how
> to tell the EJB
> about the 2.x local interface in addition to the
> business local
> interface since @Local is already being used.
I mentioned this above. You don't put it in the implements clause. In the 2.x programming model the bean class is not a direct subtype of the 2.x Local interface. The
container will derive the 2.x Local interface from the signature of the create method in
the 2.x LocalHome interface.
>
> public interface TransHistory2xLocalHome extends
> EJBLocalHome {
> public TransHistory2xLocal create() throws
> CreateException;
>
>
> public interface TransHistory2xLocal extends
> EJBLocalObject {
> public void
> recordSuccessfulTransaction(Reservation res);
> public void recordFailedTransaction(String
> errorCode, String
> rrorMessage, Reservation res);
> }
>
> @Local
> public interface TransHistoryLocal {
> public void
> recordSuccessfulTransaction(Reservation res);
> public void recordFailedTransaction(String
> errorCode, String
> rrorMessage, Reservation res);
> }
>
>
> @Stateless
> @LocalHome(TransHistoryLocalHome.class)
> public class TransHistoryBean implements
> TransHistory2xLocal {
implements TransHistoryLocal
[Message sent by forum member 'ksak' (ksak)]
http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=296779