Mridul, The intention is that Controls should be 100% conformant with the JavaBeans spec. You should be able to do things like:
- load, introspect, and use the Control bean class in any JavaBeans aware editor - use a Control anywhere a JavaBean can be used (like <jsp:useBean> JSP tag) If there are areas where they are not, then these should be filed as high-priority JIRA issues. I checked the JAR spec, and "Java-Beans:" is the correct manifest attribute, so this is definitely an oversight/bug. Both this and the serialization issue (serializability of all code-generated or supporting runtime classes is definitely a reqt too) should be opened as "Critical/fix by V1" issues. Your Controls questions and feedback are proving to be invaluable.... keep 'em coming! :) -- Kyle On 4/14/05, Mridul Muralidharan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Since ControlBean is essentially a javabean , I wanted to see the > interoperatability of controls with a pure javabean env. > For this , I got the BDK1.1 > (http://java.sun.com/products/javabeans/software/bdk_download.html - yep > , I know this is old !) and tried to load a simple control jar in it. > I had to modify the BDK code to also accept "JavaBeans: true" as a > javabean (it had a check for only "Java-Beans" - btw , is this valid ? > Have not checked the spec yet on this). > What I found was that when I try to serialize a control after having > customized it , it throws an exception indicating that it cant be > serialized. > On some digging I found that this was 'cos > "org.apache.beehive.controls.api.properties.PropertyKey" had a field > "Method _getMethod;". > Now , since Method is not serializable , this fails serialization of the > entire ControlBean. > > So question would be whether this is the intended behavior - as in > Controls were not expected to interoperate with a plain vanilla javabean > env ? > (From what I have seen till now , beehive seems to go to great pains to > maintain interoperability and is not just using and riding over the > javabeans framework). > If it is expected to interoperate, then I guess this would be a bug. > > Any thoughts , comments , help would be greatly appreciated ! > > Thanks and Regards, > Mridul >
