On Nov 16, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Bill Shannon <bill.shannon_at_oracle.com> wrote:
> Pete Muir wrote on 11/15/12 03:54:
>> Stuart Douglas just raised these concerns as well:
>>
>> * Which contexts should be active: I would say just the application context,
>> which is probably not hugely useful (this is the same point Nigel raised).
>
> Maybe not all that useful, but well defined and easy to define.
>
> We could define that the entire application runs in a single request scope,
> which would help JMS 2.0.
>
> We could also define that each event processed by the AWT event dispatch
> thread is a separate request scope, but that seems excessive.
>
>> * The other problem that just occurred to me [Stuart] is that local EJB's are
>> not present in the application client container, so if you have some code
>> that is mean't to run server side, the presence of that code will cause an
>> unsatisfied dep error. In fact the more I think about it the more problematic
>> this seems.
>
> I don't understand this one.
There's an expectation that you can add EJB capabilities to a CDI bean by adding annotations, that would not work unless we added local ejb
support to ACC. Although I don't see why we couldn't add support for that. It could be useful. I mean the way I have always viewed ACC, is just a trimmed down server that can act as a client.