On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ant, you are right. Each binding under the same service/reference should
> have a unique name, no matter if they are of the same type or not.
>
> BTW, we should now compare binding types using the QName
> (binding.getType()).
The scenario I have is the following :
<component name="ShoppingCartManager">
<implementation.java class="services.ShoppingCartManager"/>
<service name="ShoppingCart">
<tuscany:binding.jsonrpc uri="/ShoppingCart"/>
</service>
<reference name="userService" target="UserService">
<binding.sca/>
</reference>
</component>
<component name="UserService">
<implementation.java
class="org.apache.tuscany.sca.cloud.user.impl.GoogleUserService"/>
<service name="UserService">
<binding.sca/>
<tuscany:binding.jsonrpc uri="/User"/>
</service>
</component>
With the code we had, the binding name was being set as the contract
name, so there was no way we could have two bindings for the same
service... checking the 1.x code, I saw we had basically the same
algorithm, but we were allowing different binding types... so I guess
we should change the way we set the binding name.
Thoughts ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
