Hi, From the discussion here it seems the focus is mostly on providing annotations that help configure a service. I think this is interesting, but from my experience with developers that use River, they are less interested in configuration but more interested in lifecycle.
- When has my service joined? - When is my service ready [1]? - When should my service clean up resources [1]? - Are all the things my service needs (think other services) found? Certainly getting a service "working" is important, but wouldn't providing acceptable defaults be easier? Just my $0.02 Regards Dennis [1] Perhaps javax.annotation.PostConstruct and javax.annotation.PreDestroy come into play here On Sep 25, 2012, at 603AM, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote: > On 25-09-12 06:11, Greg Trasuk wrote: > >> My thought is that you'd package one or more of these classes in a jar >> file (service archive, or ".sar"?) and deploy it to the service >> container. Much like in EJB3, the container would scan the jar file for >> deployable services, and export, then register them in the appropriate >> join group. It could continue to use the > > Do you see the server part and client part strongly separated? i mean, i > would like to keep a peer-to-peer style class like Federation, but > underneath, a ServiceContainer and Client class? > > -- > QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl > Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
