BTW, they really aren't Java interfaces, but rather exposed management interfaces, which are just naming conventions.
grumble, grumble, snarl, spit...
<rant type="stupid specs">
Why have a language feature like interfaces if you speicify in all your
JSRs that everything has to be done by naming conventions and reflection?!
I swear that stupid stuff like _forcing_ a naming convention or _forcing_
the use of reflection for a tool to work is IMNSHO a pile of dung!
I have been living for quite some time without having to do any of that
crap, and I can still get at all my services and components, etc. Not
to mention it operates quicker and is easier to manage and maintain.
I think that the creation of some of the key parts as interfaces (e.g. Service/ManagedObject/whatever) -- that also follows the naming conventions -- can then be made easier to (a) force implementors to use those names, and (b) easier to code elsewhere. And it can /also/ be managed by the JSRs.
IMNSHO that may give better performance, and we only need to externalise the dynamic stuff when external tools talk to Geronimo, not for itself internally :-)
Alex.
