Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > And add the javadoc tags to your source code, and everything else is > done by the plugin.
Is there a reason that you chose Javadoc tags over Java annotations? > WDYT? There are some facets specified in these tags that I'd be reluctant to include in the source code for the affected classes. Deciding which classes should be exposed from a bundle as services feels like it should be part of the bundle-level declarations, not bound to the classes involved. Similarly, specifying which services a given class depends upon (say, by way of a filter) also feels too specific to be bound as part of the source code. The plugin looks like a nice solution and it's well thought out. My criticism is not meant to attack the plugin itself, but more to question whether it's encouraging specification in the right place or at the right level. For the record, I have many of the same reservations about Google Guice. -- Steven E. Harris
