What about something like (1) @Activators can be declared either on composites or mixins (today only on composites) (2) As as side-effect, both a composite or a mixin may implements ServiceActivation with the desired effect (just syntactical sugar around @Activators) (3) Initializable could be changed to be syntactical sugar around @Activators - so may be used both on composites or mixins
Open question: Can ObjectFactory#newObject in any meaningful way be changed to use @Activators instead of Initializable? I guess not, since the destruction methods would never be invoked, thus potentially leading to confusion. /Kent Den 12-11-2015 kl. 09:52 skrev Paul Merlin: > Niclas Hedhman a écrit : >> Ok, naming might be an issue, but there is a deeper one. >> >> Is it correct that the ServiceActivation.activateService() is called on the >> ServiceComposite and not each Mixin implementing it?? > Correct. > >> Just like Initializable was changed to be called on the Mixin, instead of >> the Composite, I think a similar lifecycle method pair is needed for >> Services. Otherwise it is really hard to make very generic Mixins that >> works independently of the whole ServiceComposite. >> >> Lifecycle is another interface with these semantics for entities. > Makes sense. Could you please capture that in a JIRA? > > Cheers > > /Paul >
