Raymond, Just curious: did you fix it in a way such that the .componentType property definition matters or is the component property definition enough to have the value injected?
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > It turned out this test case is not adding incompatible changes from the > componentType file. We were checking if the field is public upon the > injection of a property value. It was an interpretation of the Java A&A: > > 1349 Properties may also be injected via public setter methods even when > the @Property annotation is not > 1350 present. However, the @Property annotation must be used in order to > inject a property onto a non-public > 1351 field. In the case where there is no @Property annotation, the name of > the property is the same as the > 1352 name of the field or setter. > > See TUSCANY-2289 too. > > I just fixed it by not checking if the field is public. > > Thanks, > Raymond > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Kevin Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 10:38 AM > To: "Raymond Feng (JIRA)" <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-2383) Cannot define component > property with Component Type File > > > I may not fully understand your comment but it seems inconsistent to >> support the provision of component type information via a type file >> for service and reference elements but not for property elements. >> >> In the test I have only removed the @Property annotation from the java >> implementation and replaced it with an element in the Component Type >> File. >> >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Raymond Feng (JIRA) >> <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> [ >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2383?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12604572#action_12604572] >>> >>> Raymond Feng commented on TUSCANY-2383: >>> --------------------------------------- >>> >>> If the component is implemented in java, I think this is a grey area in >>> the spec. The spec says the configuration in the componentType should be >>> compatible with the result from the instrospection of implemention. Let's >>> say your purpose is to declare a property in the componentType file, then it >>> has to be associated to a field or setter in the java class. Is the >>> field/setter required to be protected or public? My understanding is that we >>> can use the componentType to provide a default value to a property, but not >>> "add" a new property if it doesn't exist in the impl class. >>> >>> There are discussions on the ML about if we should use componentType to >>> redefine the service interface using interface.wsdl. I think these are in >>> the same area. >>> >>> Cannot define component property with Component Type File >>>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Key: TUSCANY-2383 >>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2383 >>>> Project: Tuscany >>>> Issue Type: Bug >>>> Components: Java SCA Core Runtime >>>> Affects Versions: Java-SCA-Next >>>> Reporter: Kevin Williams >>>> >>>> Lines 450-451 of the Assembly spec: >>>> The componentType element can contain Service elements, Reference >>>> elements and Property elements. >>>> I defined a test that inspects an injected property value. In the >>>> initial version I defined the property using the @Property annotation. I >>>> then tried replacing the annotation with an entry in a Component Type File >>>> without success. >>>> The test: >>>> org.apache.tuscany.sca.vtest.assembly.ctypefile.CompomnentTypeFileTestCase.typeFile3 >>>> demonstrates this failure and is currently @Ignore(d) >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >>> - >>> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. >>> >>> >>>
