Thanks Felix Am 28.11.2014 um 13:12 schrieb Timothée Maret <timothee.ma...@gmail.com<mailto:timothee.ma...@gmail.com>>:
Hi Felix, I agree, OSGI events have the advantage of leveraging distribution features from the platform (blaklisting, async, etc.) instead of implementing an ad hoc observer pattern. I'll update the PR with the OSGI approach. Regards, Timothee 2014-11-28 12:52 GMT+01:00 Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com<mailto:fmesc...@adobe.com>>: Hi This sounds useful to me. Lets do OSGi events to decouple the actual listener handling and event distribution from the tenant manager. Regards Felix -- Typos caused by my iPhone > Am 27.11.2014 um 16:56 schrieb Timothée Maret > <timothee.ma...@gmail.com<mailto:timothee.ma...@gmail.com>>: > > Hi, > > Currently, there is no clean way to detect when a tenant has been > added/removed/modified. > > We may detect when a change is required by implementing the > TenantCustomizer interface, however, it tells nothing about the actual > completion of the change. > We may listen for OSGI events under /etc/tenants but this requires the user > to know where the tenants are located (which afaik, currently is not > exposed). > > In order to allow apps reacting on tenant changes, I propose to either: > > I. extend the current SPI with an interface TenantEventListener that users > can implement ; or > II. send OSGI events form the current implementation. > > In both cases, the events should cover > * Tenant added > * Tenant removed > * Property added > * Property removed > > wdyt ? > > Regards, > > Timothee -- Timothée Maret
