+1 from me...looks like the right track.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> Sorry I've been a bit checked out lately... working on 1.1.
>
> I think we all agree in the APIs for sessions themselves (i.e.,
> everything but location), and we agree that we need an event interface
> like this:
>
> void addSessionListener(SessionListener listener);
> void removeSessionListener(SessionListener listener);
>
> public interface SessionListener extends Listener {
> void valueBound(SessionEvent event);
> void valueUnbound(SessionEvent event);
> void attributeAdded(SessionEvent event);
> void attributeRemoved(SessionEvent event);
> void attributeReplaced(SessionEvent event);
> void valueBound(SessionEvent event);
> void valueUnbound(SessionEvent event);
> void sessionCreated(SessionEvent event)
> void sessionDestroyed(SessionEvent event)
> }
>
> public class SessionEvent extends Event {
> Session getSession();
> String getName();
> String getOldValue();
> String getNewValue();
> }
>
> We still disagree on how exactly you obtain the session object for a
> given session id. I think the most important part of this disagreement
> to solve first, is should we have an API to make the redirect/proxy/move
> decision on a generic invocation object, or should we have the session
> API know the location of the session (this is what is does now, but this
> is not necessarily the final API).
>
> Does everyone agree with this summary? If so, I suggest we add the
> agreed upon event interface above and continue our discussion about last
> contentious point.
>
> -dain
