Pa_ko, actually, it's nothing sinister against EJBs, it's just a matter of scope. In starting up this collaborative process I knew that we'd have all sorts of people interested in all sorts of things, mainly because JDeveloper supports so many technologies. While this is great from the tools and developers point of view, it's not great from the collaborative point of view, as I wanted people to focus their efforts. As such I limited the *initial* discussions to ADF BC + ADF Faces RC (a big enough undertaking regardless you'll agree).

I'm sorry we haven't picked your exact interests to start with, but as the saying goes, you can only satisfy 80% of the people 20% of the time.

Thus I encourage you to start considering your own interests and form your own sub-group among the existing collaborators. In time if the overall ADF methodology moves on, it will hopefully consider EJBs too, + the array of other technologies.

By the way, you're being somewhat flippant about "Oracle's sentimental reasons for keeping BCs a live". That's just your subjective opinion. Oracle has announced several times now that ADF BC is core to Fusion Apps and ADF BC has been around far longer than EJB3.0+, that shows resiliance in my books. In dismissing ADF BC as you've done here, you've actually done what we've done to your preferred EJBs, and you can see my response in turn.

CM.

4  out of 4 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?