This is a real world issue for me. I recently implemented 2 version of an auditing service, one which used log4j to persist and another that used a db. When I created the later db version I added the CommitAfter annotations to the service interface making the change a little messy and not entirely suitable for the prior log4j implementation.
It would seem to make more sense for the CommitAfter and PersistenceContext annotations to be in the implementing class. Maybe you can do this anyway - I can't remember if I checked this or not, but I think I did and it doesn't work that way. John ----- Original Message ----- From: Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo To: Tapestry development Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 2:27 PM Subject: Copy annotations from servce implementation to proxies On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 06:05:14 -0300, <no-re...@comments.apache.org> wrote: > Hello, > John has commented on > http://tapestry.apache.org/integrating-with-jpa.html. > You can find the comment here: > http://tapestry.apache.org/integrating-with-jpa.html#comment_1410 > Please note that if the comment contains a hyperlink, it must be approved > before it is shown on the site. > > Below is the reply that was posted: > ~~~~ > Adding implementations specific annotations to the service interfaces > breaks the interface/implementation independence. > ~~~~ I agree with this. What do you guys think? I think this is a serious shotcoming in Tapestry-IoC. -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org
