EasyBeans is an open-source Enterprise Java Beans (EJB) container hosted by the OW2 consortium. The License used by EasyBeans is the LGPL.
EasyBeans main goal is to ease the development of Enterprise Java Beans. It uses some new architecture design like the bytecode injection (with ASM ObjectWeb tool), IoC, POJO and can be embedded in OSGi bundles or other frameworks (Spring, Eclipse plugins, etc.).
It aims to provide an EJB3 container as specified in the Java Platform Enterprise Edition (Java EE) in its fifth version. It means that Session beans (Stateless or Stateful), Message Driven Beans (MDB) are available on EasyBeans.
The new persistence layer used by EJB 3.0 is now called Java Persistence API (or JPA). It replaces the CMP (Container Managed Persistence) model used by EJB 2.x. The default persistence provider used in EasyBeans is Hibernate Entity Manager or Apache OpenJPA but other JPA providers have been tested like for example Oracle TopLink Essentials.
This application is an end-to-end sample application for .NET Enterprise Application Server technologies. It is a service-oriented application based on Windows Communication Foundation (.NET 3.0) and ASP.NET, and illustrates many of the .NET enterprise development technologies for building highly scalable, rich "enterprise-connected" applications. It is designed as a benchmark kit to illustrate alternative technologies within .NET and their relative performance. The application offers full interoperability with Java Enterprise, including IBM WebSphere's Trade 6.1 sample application, and newly provided implementations on Oracle Application Server 10G (OC4J) and Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3 (Oracle implementations included with the download below). As such, the application offers an excellent opportunity for developers to learn about .NET and building interoperable, service-oriented applications.
Ever wondered how large enterprise scale systems are designed? Before major software development starts, we have to choose a suitable architecture that will provide us with the desired functionality…
Service-oriented architecture has proven to be a boon in the computing world. At its core, SOA provides enterprise patterns for systems development and integration where legacy systems are viewed as discrete business capabilities and packaged as standards-based services interfaces. SOA also typically describes an IT infrastructure that allows different applications to exchange data with one another as they participate within business processes. Over the past few years, SOA has grown almost exponentially in popularity, becoming one way for companies to knit together applications and processes in a flexible, reusable and cost-effective way. SOA separates functions into distinct units, or services, which developers make accessible to users over a network, ideally allowing them to combine and reuse them in the creation of business applications. These services communicate with each other by passing data from one service to another or by coordinating an activity between two or more services.
L. Botturi, M. Derntl, E. Boot, and K. Figl. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT2006). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE, (2006)
S. Angelov, P. Grefen, and D. Greefhorst. Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, 2009 & European Conference on Software Architecture. WICSA/ECSA 2009, page 141--150. IEEE, (September 2009)
F. Akmel, E. Birhanu, B. Siraj, and S. Shifa. International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), 7 (5/6):
01-12(November 2017)
B. Latour, and A. Yaneva. Explorations in architecture: Teaching, design, research, (2008)"It is well known that we live in a very different world than that of Euclidian space: phenomenologists (and psychologists of the Gibsonian school) have never tired of showing that there is an immense distance in the way an embodied mind experiences its surroundings from the “objective” shape that “material” objects are said to possess. They have tried to add to the “Galilean” bodies rolling through Euclidian space, “human” bodies ambling through a “lived” environment. I All this is very well, except it does nothing more than to reproduce, at the level of architecture, the usual split between subjective and objective dimensions that has always paralyzed architectural theory—not to mention the well known split it has introduced between the architectural and engineering professions (and not to mention the catastrophic consequences it has had on philosophy proper). What is so strange in this argument is that it takes for granted that engineering drawings on a piece of paper and, later, projective geometry offer a good description of the so-called “material” world. This is the hidden presupposition in the whole of phenomenology: we have to add human subjective intentional dimensions to a “material” world that is well described by geometric shapes and mathematical calculations. The paradoxical aspect of this division of labor envisioned by those who want to add the “lived” dimensions of human perspective to the “objective” necessities of material existence is that, in order to avoid reducing humans to things, they first had to reduce things to drawings." p 82.