I have spoken face to face with Francesco I understood that he don't
want to create a new EventAdmin but just a bundle that act like and
EventAdmin. Let me clarify that.
I know.
The Event Admin(EA) is used to split Event Publisher(EP) from Event
Handler(EH), so it's duty of EA to discover which EH receive a Event
every time EP send an Event. So the EP won't even know who and if
someone have handled the Event.
In our case the situation is quite different, in fact to avoid the
overload off UPnP Network we set up a EP only when EH are present so our
Bridge will need the code that handle such things.
Understood.
So because we have the code that track EH we can even avoid to go
thought the EA for sending the event.
That is the problem right there. I understand the proposal but there
is a bit more to the EA than the plain tracking of EventHandlers.
There are for example some security aspects that the EventAdmin needs
to handle too.
Before say that's not correct please notice that this behavior even if
it's not the one aspect by OSGi Analyst is not out of spec and also
we'll avoid the duplication the execution of code that track EH. BTW, I
know that such implementation may be not clear to understood at the
beginning.
I understand the implementation and I already stated several times
that it is in line with the spec. Still, in order to get this right
you end-up with all the functionality of the EventAdmin. This is where
the code duplication is.
Finally, that's the way Francesco thought about "distributed EA"
To be perfectly clear, Francesco's proposal is a valid solution and a
good one too (IMHO). All I'm trying to do is to find the optimal
balance between reuse and the network issues.
Stefano "Kismet" Lenzi
P.S.: The only extra code need will be a tracking of EA because when
none are present on OSGi our bridge must stop to send Event to EH
As mentioned above, its not only the tracking but the security as well.
regards,
Karl
--
Karl Pauls
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
