2008/9/24 Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Gang,
>
> I had an unexpected behavior of Activatable, which I don't know whether it
> is a bug or confusing me in general.
>
> If I do
>
> public class AbcMixin
> implements Activatable, Abc
> {
> }
>
> The activate() method will NOT be called if the AbcMixin is part of a
> ServiceComposite and that ServiceComposite does NOT extends Activatable.
>
> I have not checked, but I suspect that, only Activatable is called on the
> ServiceComposite and not on the Mixin fragment, which means only one
> activate() method on the Mixin will be called.
>
>
> Somehow this feels very strange. Perhaps my use-case is tainting my
> objectivity but isn't it the Mixin itself that has "activation" and
> "passivation" needs, and not the Composite? Only the Mixin knows what
> resources it needs to allocate and free up. Why would the ServiceComposite
> have a clue? And likewise, if more than one Mixin has a need only one will
> be called, and can't deal with it unless one create a strong relationship
> from one to the other....
>
> That said, I realize that a Mixin would always have the same need, no
> matter if it is part of a ServiceComposite or some other Composite, and we
> can't fulfill such contract easily (or can we?).
>
> My proposal is that Activatable is checked on the Fragments and called
> individually upon ServiceComposite activation/passivation.
>
I haven't looked closely at the activation code, but that sounds right to me
(principal of least surprise)
> WDYT?
>
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>
> _______________________________________________
> qi4j-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
>
>
--
Cheers, Stuart
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
