Benson, I wouldn't consider the Bus as a "VM" level static registry thing. Applications can easily create multiple busses to meet various needs.
One example is the JAXWS TCK. The TCK deploys 90+ wars, and each war gets it's own CXFServlet and it's own bus. Thus, hanging purely "static" stuff off there may not make sense. Most likely, if the data really is immutable, just make a static in the class and be done with it. Otherwise, stick it in the databinding object for the service and make it per service as Willem suggested. Dan On Tuesday 26 February 2008, Benson Margulies wrote: > Folks, > > I'm thinking through an occasionally-discussed plan to clean up Aegis, > removing some xfire-artifact architecture. > > The proposal, originating with DanD, is to eliminate the > TypeMappingRegistry. There will still be type maps, but not so many of > them. I would expect the usual situation to be that each service has a > type map that falls back to one of the two stock SOAP type maps. > > Which brings me to my question. I've never had a terribly firm grip on > the Bus architecture. It seems to me that Aegis wants to have a bus > extension in which it can initialize, once-per-jvm, the two standard > soap type maps. We want this to initialize only if needed, but we want > it to be thread-safe. > > Can some kind soul point me at a pattern of this sort of thing? -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer, IONA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
