Hello I am a new comer to this forum, nice to meet you all. I have a problem in working out the diagram: I am now using rational rose to model part 2. When I am working on the class diagram, all the classes are seperated by the packages. say: com.fbn.travel.entity.XXXEJB.XXXBean com.fbn.travel.entity.XXXEJB.XXXHome com.fbn.travel.entity.XXXEJB.XXXRemote then I will have package com, inside it I will have fbn and so on. I find it very hard to show the dependency of different EJB Components and classes across the package. Is there any method to model this? Also within the EJB package I will show all the remote and home interfaces. Is it correct? Would anyone please tell me whether I am in the right track in modeling the class and component diagram. Thx alot
Sorry something more, the reason I find it hard to model the dependency is that say: a User will have zero or many Order. If I model it just like normal classes, I will have a class diagram showing User Class HAVE Order Class. But now I am modeling the EJB components, and the whole component is represented by the "PACKAGE" ICON, so I cannot model such a relation. How can I do it? A little bit background, as before I use Together in office, and they model EJB Component as a single attraction in the diagram. So it is really confuse to me. Thx again
You guys are getting wound around the axle with un-needed details. Just keep it simple! I did my diagrams with Visio, and had nothing about dependencies! Local and remote interfaces? Just stick with best practice, and have your Entity EJB's local from a Session bean with Remote interfaces.
Dear Kent, Does it mean that I should just model Entity Bean as a single attraction instead of having local interface, remote interface, home and local home? But how about packaging, as I am using Rational Rose, all my classes are seperated by the package, so if I model with Rose, I will have package within package and finally reaching the leaf package with a single attraction of entity bean inside? How about the Value Object that I use in the model? As the entity bean has dependency on such value object as parameter or return value. Should I model them too?
I suggest that you set up the Entity Beans with local interfaces, callable by Session Beans with Remote interfaces for speed and efficiency. Certainly include any VO's you might deem necessary. My point is that I don't believe the reviewers are looking at minutely-defined, rarified concepts as fundamental to success (did't Rumbaugh say you would probably do 80% of your modeling with 20% of the UML?) Also, a good point to consider is wrestle with the business problem, not the tool.