On 2002.10.03 12:02:40 -0400 Scott M Stark wrote: > Ok, but should the lifecycle of the interceptors be the same as the > lifecycle of the bean? Right now a service is an mbean that is > available through the jmx-console indepedenent of its JBoss service > lifecycle notion. How is that going to change if the dependency is > embedded into the interceptors?
I _think_ it won't be a problem, but I'll let you know after some experiments. thanks for pointing this out. david jencks > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Scott Stark > Chief Technology Officer > JBoss Group, LLC > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:23 AM > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] EJB's as Xmbeans? > > > > I want to remove the current anomoly that calling say start on an mbean > > directly bypasses the dependency checking whereas calling > > ServiceController.start(mbeanName) does the dependency checking. > Putting > > the ServiceContext and dependency checking code in an interceptor will > do > > this. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
