This is an implementation detail so it sounds fine to me. If there was a way to deprecate the existing method instead of just replacing it would be better though. If not, the change is just fine and I don't expect someone using/extending directly the implementation.
Cheers, Bruno On 12/11/2007, Paul McMahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The LifecycleProvider interface was introduced in MyFaces core 1.2.0 > as an integration point that allows Java EE containers to handle > annotation processing for JSF managed beans. In order to help > containers invoke @PostConstruct methods more consistently with the > Java EE RI (glassfish) we are discussing changing this API in: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1761 > > I attached a patch (MYFACES-1761-01.diff) to that JIRA that would > change a method signature from : > LifecycleProvider.newInstance(String className) > to > LifecycleProvider.newInstance(ManagedBean beanConfig) > > The only known implementer of the LifecycleProvider interface > (outside of MyFaces itself) is the Geronimo project, which is in > favor of this change. Are there any concerns with changing this > external api in the upcoming 1.2.1 maintenance release? > > BTW, this patch also refactors ManagedBeanBuilder into > ManageBeanInitializer so that the existing code in that class can > still be used to initialize managed properties. Unless I am > mistaken ManagedBeanBuilder was not intended to be externally > overridden or extended, so refactoring it should not affect our users. > > > Best wishes, > Paul >
