I can travel sucessfully through a tree, by using a stateless EJB(BrowseAction) action that updates a named Pojo(State). keeping the state. Everything session scope (!).

In order to allow multiple windows browsing at the same time, I am trying to use conversations(!). A quick solution without changing much code: action starts up a conversation in the state object.

***BrowseAction:***
@Stateful //tried stateful too
@Name("treeSelector")
public class BrowseAction implements Browse{

 //@Out(scope=ScopeType.CONVERSATION)
 @In(scope=ScopeType.CONVERSATION, value="#{state}") @Out(scope=ScopeType.CONVERSATION)
 private State state;

 public String changeTree() {
 state.startConversation();
...
 state.setNode(new-node-id);
 return nextPage();
 }

and

***State: ***
@Scope(ScopeType.CONVERSATION)
@Stateful
@Name("state")
@Conversational(ifNotBegunOutcome="home")
@Interceptors(SeamInterceptor.class)
public class StateSB implements Serializable, State{
...
 @Begin
 public void startConversation() {
 System.out.println("state:startConversation:"+this);
 }

 @End
 public void endConversation() {
 System.out.println("state:endConversation");
 }

 public StateSB() {
 super();
 System.out.println("....Creating State:"+this);
 }

@Remove @Destroy
public void destroy() {System.out.println("+++++++++ destroying state" );}

With this code or all small alternatives (See @In attribs) I tried, I notice that when I use "Scope.conversational", my state object is being destroyed after my changeTree is being called & executed correctly. I.e. the state seems to be never really saved back into the context (so, I got fresh page each time). I thought the destroy is maybe inited from the BrowseAction, which is why I tried that one to be stateful... If I change state to SESSION again, everything works fine, no destructions (but then 2 windows are not browsing independent)

Same thing did not work leaving the State object as a POJO (cfr. 'numberguess'example Seam doc, but then without using pageflow attrib. (is this required?) )

By the way, is it correct to use stateful EJB versus named POJOs when there is more functionality than getters&setters?

This was intended to be a quick enhancement.. but I can't get it working :(