http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/PLX-366
2008/3/7, Olivier Lamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > 2008/3/4, Rahul Thakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Is 'plexus-spring' moving to Plexus SVN then? > > IMHO, this will be great. > > Is there any legacy issue to moving this ? > > If not, nicolas, as you are not a plexus committer. > Can you load an issue in jira with an attached patch ? > We can put this in > https://svn.codehaus.org/plexus/plexus-sandbox/trunk/plexus-components/ > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier > > > > > +1 for merge if all is good to go. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Rahul > > > > > > > > Brett Porter wrote: > > > Cool. Is there anything left to do on here now, or should we look at > > > merging it to trunk? > > > > > > On 02/03/2008, at 6:33 PM, nicolas de loof wrote: > > > > > >> That's what I supposed but just want to verify. > > >> > > >> 2008/3/1, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >>> > > >>> It may not be necessary - presumably webwork's built in spring > object > > >>> factory that you are now using does this already. > > >>> > > >>> On 01/03/2008, at 8:11 PM, nicolas de loof wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Thanks for the link, I'll translate this idea to spring. > > >>>> > > >>>> cheers, > > >>>> Nicolas. > > >>>> > > >>>> 2008/2/29, Olivier Lamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Yes all per-lookup component must be released (for a long live > > >>>>> application). > > >>>>> To do that there is a interceptor to add in the webwork stack > (look > > >>>>> the note in the bottom of [1] yes sometimes it's possible to find > a > > >>>>> small documentation on plexus :-) ) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Maybe you can add a similar interceptor. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Olivier > > >>>>> > > >>>>> [1] > > >>> > http://plexus.codehaus.org/plexus-components/plexus-xwork-integration/ > > >>>>> > > >>>>> 2008/2/29, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >>>>>> the reason in plexus was because each action was allocated on > every > > >>>>>> request and not released - I just want to check whether that was > the > > >>>>>> case again here. I think Olivier investigated it originally - is > he > > >>>>>> listening here? :) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> - Brett > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On 29/02/2008, at 7:43 PM, nicolas de loof wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> // Release existing > > >>>>>>>>> - release( archivaConfiguration ); > > >>>>>>>>> +// FIXME spring equivalent ? release( archivaConfiguration > > >>>>> ); > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I don't know if spring takes care of managing them itself - > but we > > >>>>>>>> need to look into this since we used to have leaks from the > webapp > > >>>>>>>> when it never released the components. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> AFAIK there is no way in spring to "remove" a bean from the > > >>>>>>> context. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Not sure what is the requirement here, I suppose we want to > FORCE > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>> singleton "archivaConfiguration" bean to get reloaded / > refreshed. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The best option IMHO is to use use a BeanNameAutoProxyCreator > to > > >>>>>>> create a > > >>>>>>> proxy for the "archivaConfiguration" singleton. An interceptor > > >>>>>>> could > > >>>>>>> cache > > >>>>>>> the active concrete implementation instance, declared as > prototype, > > >>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>> expose a "release()" management method to force a new lookup. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Nicolas. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> Brett Porter > > >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>>>>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Brett Porter > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > -- > > > Brett Porter > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > > > > > > > >
